EXECUTIVE ORDERS
January 21, 2009
Executive Order -- Presidential Records
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ExecutiveOrderPresidentialRecords/
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(a) "Archivist" refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee.
(b) "NARA" refers to the National Archives and Records Administration.
(c) "Presidential Records Act" refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207.
(d) "NARA regulations" refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270.
(e) "Presidential records" refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records.
(f) "Former President" refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created.
(g) A "substantial question of executive privilege" exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch.
(h) A "final court order" is a court order from which no appeal may be taken.
Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records.
(a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.
(b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records covered by the notice, unless during that time period the Archivist has received a claim of executive privilege by the incumbent or former President or the Archivist has been instructed by the incumbent President or his designee to extend the time period for a time certain and with reason for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a shorter period of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the notice.
Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President.
(a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified.
(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be notified promptly of any such determination.
(c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the President and the Attorney General.
(d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order.
Sec. 4. Claim of Executive Privilege by Former President.
(a) Upon receipt of a claim of executive privilege by a living former President, the Archivist shall consult with the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel), the Counsel to the President, and such other executive agencies as the Archivist deems appropriate concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege. Any determination under section 3 of this order that executive privilege shall not be invoked by the incumbent President shall not prejudice the Archivist's determination with respect to the former President's claim of privilege.
(b) In making the determination referred to in subsection (a) of this section, the Archivist shall abide by any instructions given him by the incumbent President or his designee unless otherwise directed by a final court order. The Archivist shall notify the incumbent and former Presidents of his determination at least 30 days prior to disclosure of the Presidential records, unless a shorter time period is required in the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.
Sec. 5. General Provisions.
(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is revoked.
BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 21, 2009
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/FreedomofInformationAct/
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
SUBJECT: Freedom of Information Act
A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency. As Justice Louis Brandeis wrote, "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." In our democracy, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which encourages accountability through transparency, is the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open Government. At the heart of that commitment is the idea that accountability is in the interest of the Government and the citizenry alike.
The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears. Nondisclosure should never be based on an effort to protect the personal interests of Government officials at the expense of those they are supposed to serve. In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies (agencies) should act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are servants of the public.
All agencies should adopt a presumption in favor of disclosure, in order to renew their commitment to the principles embodied in FOIA, and to usher in a new era of open Government. The presumption of disclosure should be applied to all decisions involving FOIA.
The presumption of disclosure also means that agencies should take affirmative steps to make information public. They should not wait for specific requests from the public. All agencies should use modern technology to inform citizens about what is known and done by their Government. Disclosure should be timely.
I direct the Attorney General to issue new guidelines governing the FOIA to the heads of executive departments and agencies, reaffirming the commitment to accountability and transparency, and to publish such guidelines in the Federal Register. In doing so, the Attorney General should review FOIA reports produced by the agencies under Executive Order 13392 of December 14, 2005. I also direct the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to update guidance to the agencies to increase and improve information dissemination to the public, including through the use of new technologies, and to publish such guidance in the Federal Register.
This memorandum does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
The Director of the Office of Management and Budget is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
BARACK OBAMA
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government
My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.
Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.
Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the Government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public input on how we can increase and improve opportunities for public participation in Government.
Government should be collaborative. Collaboration actively engages Americans in the work of their Government. Executive departments and agencies should use innovative tools, methods, and systems to cooperate among themselves, across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector. Executive departments and agencies should solicit public feedback to assess and improve their level of collaboration and to identify new opportunities for cooperation.
I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum. The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive.
This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
This memorandum shall be published in the Federal Register.
BARACK OBAMA
National Security Archive Report:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20090121/index.htm
Washington, D.C., January 21, 2009 - On his first full day in office, President Barack Obama signed an executive order and two presidential memoranda heralding what he called a "new era of openness." Announcing a Presidential Memorandum on the Freedom of Information Act to reestablish a presumption of disclosure for information requested under FOIA, President Obama said that "every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known."
The FOIA Memorandum articulates a presumption of disclosure for government records and a hostility to the use of secrecy laws to cover up embarrassing information. It directs the Attorney General to issue new guidelines governing FOIA and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to improve information dissemination to the public.
President Obama also issued an executive order reversing changes made by President George W. Bush to the Presidential Records Act (PRA), stating he would hold himself and his own records "to a new standard of openness." The PRA order permits only the incumbent president (and not former presidents' heirs or designees or former vice presidents) to assert constitutional privileges to withhold information, and would provide for review by the Attorney General and the White House Counsel before a president could claim privilege over his or her records.
Finally, President Obama also today issued a Presidential Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government which recognizes that "[o]penness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government." It directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Chief Technology Officer, and the Administrator of the General Services Administration to develop an Open Government Directive within 120 days to implement the memo.
"This is the earliest and most emphatic call for open government from any president in history," said Archive director Tom Blanton. "President Obama has reversed two of the most dramatic secrecy moves of the Bush initiatives, one that told agencies to withhold whatever they could under FOIA and the other that gave presidential heirs and vice presidents the power to withhold presidential records indefinitely."
In November 2008, the National Security Archive and a coalition of more than 60 organizations called on President Obama to reverse the secrecy trend and issue new directives on openness on Day One of his presidency. Today, President Obama heeded that call and took decisive action to ensure that openness, transparency, and accountability would be the rules and not the exceptions for his administration.
"President Obama is doing what he said he would do from the campaign trail. He is trying to transform how the public will learn about government decisions and actions" said Meredith Fuchs, the Archive's General Counsel. "I hope his decisive leadership on these issues pushes the bureaucracy to make these principles a reality -- to give us an accountable, democratic, national government."
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Dear Mr. President Elect
Dear President-Elect Obama,
As quoted in Mr. Michael R. Trioglia's letter to Representative Nancy Pelosi, We need to take the advice from former President John F. Kennedy who said,” Let us not seek the Republican or the Democratic answer, but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blamefor the past. Let us accept our responsibility for the future.”
I wish to emphasize the words, "but the right answer," in my comments. In this spirit I ask that the death of President Kennedy be opened to a new and honest investigation and hearings before the American people.
As there is the call to not bring up the past to blame, there is a greater need for the Truth to be brought out, because the past Truths cannot and will not be buried until the American people are told how and why our beloved President was murdered.
I speak from personal knowledge and experience of having been told of the impending assassination of the President seven months before it happened by a Jose A. Rivera, a Civil Service employee of the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Blindness of the National Institutes of Health. He was also a former US Army Colonel and member of the US Army Reserves. This information was given to US Secret Service Agent John W. Rice, in the presence of FBI Special Liaison Agent Orrin Bartlett in New Orleans, Louisiana, on Sunday, November 24, 1963. Mr. Bartlett was a liaison between the FBI, the Secret Service , and the White House. Mr. Bartlett called his Headquarters in Washington and the Baltimore Office of the FBI, asking that Mr. Rivera be brought in for Interrogation.
Letters to various Congressional Committees produced no interest or results, as did numerous Freedom of Information letters to the Secret Service, the FBI and the CIA. I testified before the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) in Dallas in 1994. Records of mine and Rivera's are in the NARA II Collection of Kennedy Documents in Box 18 of the Douglas Horne (ARRB staff member) Section.
In the interest of transparency and the spirit of change and Truth, I now plead that this issue be addressed, and soon, for the sake of all Americans and our future generations.
Most Respectfully,
Adele E. U. Edisen, Ph.D.
Cc: Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Patrick Murphy, Harry Reid,
Steny Hoyer, Eric Cantor, James Clyburn, Robert Byrd,
Mitch McConnell, Jon Kyl, J. Boehner, Edward Kennedy
This is from the Citizen's Briefing Book Site (Letters to Obama)
http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/
http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/ideas/viewIdea.apexp?id=087800000004qh6&srPos=0&srKp=087
Also, visit my friends over at Deep Politics:
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3041#post3041
Where Adele adds:
...Despite Obama's "centrism" and support from some rich folks, there is something to be said for the "Power of the People."
Just as the thousands and the millions, who marched, wrote, and demonstrated on behalf of Civil Rights in the '50s and '60s when success was so elusive, managed to influence Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, followed by other laws and Supreme Court decisions. Today such a massive letter-writing, e-mailing, telephoning campaign and movement could overcome the inertia of a sluggish administration and Congress to open remaining files and to re-investigate the John F. Kennedy assassination and other political assassinations.
The American people should not have to live with the untruths and lies and evasions of our political past. Our future generations deserve better than that.
Anyone who is so inclined has my permission to reprint my letter and send it to their local newspaper or news media outlet. I also urge anyone who so wishes to write their own letters to President Obama and their own legislators in the US House and Senate, requesting release of withheld files and honest hearings before the American people.
Adele
Posted with permission from the author. -BK
President Barrack Obama
White House
Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington D.C.
William Kelly
Coalition on Political Assassinations
Washington D.C.
January 25, 2009
Dear President Obama,
While Open Government isn't a category among your administrative "Briefing Books" on the internet, you made it a national priority when, among your first actions as president, you issued Executive Orders regarding the disposition of Presidential Papers and open government and ordered that these issues be addressed and a report issued by May 20, 2009.
In support of Dr. Adele Edisen's plea, many significant government records on the assassination of President Kennedy are still being withheld from the public, despite the JFK Act of 1992 and the work and recommendations of the Assassinations Records Review Board (ARRB). All of the withheld records concern the national security of the United States, some of which are designated to be released in 2017.
The national security of the nation today now depends on these records being released to the public, and a proper and independent investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy, so it can be determined how such a crime could have happened, how it was covered up and what the national security implications are today.
The most significant threat to the national security today is the assassination of the President, and it would not be as signficant a danger today if the issues of the murder of President Kennedy were properly resolved, and it will remain so until the assassination of President Kennedy is resolved.
William Kelly
William Kelly
As quoted in Mr. Michael R. Trioglia's letter to Representative Nancy Pelosi, We need to take the advice from former President John F. Kennedy who said,” Let us not seek the Republican or the Democratic answer, but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the blamefor the past. Let us accept our responsibility for the future.”
I wish to emphasize the words, "but the right answer," in my comments. In this spirit I ask that the death of President Kennedy be opened to a new and honest investigation and hearings before the American people.
As there is the call to not bring up the past to blame, there is a greater need for the Truth to be brought out, because the past Truths cannot and will not be buried until the American people are told how and why our beloved President was murdered.
I speak from personal knowledge and experience of having been told of the impending assassination of the President seven months before it happened by a Jose A. Rivera, a Civil Service employee of the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Blindness of the National Institutes of Health. He was also a former US Army Colonel and member of the US Army Reserves. This information was given to US Secret Service Agent John W. Rice, in the presence of FBI Special Liaison Agent Orrin Bartlett in New Orleans, Louisiana, on Sunday, November 24, 1963. Mr. Bartlett was a liaison between the FBI, the Secret Service , and the White House. Mr. Bartlett called his Headquarters in Washington and the Baltimore Office of the FBI, asking that Mr. Rivera be brought in for Interrogation.
Letters to various Congressional Committees produced no interest or results, as did numerous Freedom of Information letters to the Secret Service, the FBI and the CIA. I testified before the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) in Dallas in 1994. Records of mine and Rivera's are in the NARA II Collection of Kennedy Documents in Box 18 of the Douglas Horne (ARRB staff member) Section.
In the interest of transparency and the spirit of change and Truth, I now plead that this issue be addressed, and soon, for the sake of all Americans and our future generations.
Most Respectfully,
Adele E. U. Edisen, Ph.D.
Cc: Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Patrick Murphy, Harry Reid,
Steny Hoyer, Eric Cantor, James Clyburn, Robert Byrd,
Mitch McConnell, Jon Kyl, J. Boehner, Edward Kennedy
This is from the Citizen's Briefing Book Site (Letters to Obama)
http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/
http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/ideas/viewIdea.apexp?id=087800000004qh6&srPos=0&srKp=087
Also, visit my friends over at Deep Politics:
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3041#post3041
Where Adele adds:
...Despite Obama's "centrism" and support from some rich folks, there is something to be said for the "Power of the People."
Just as the thousands and the millions, who marched, wrote, and demonstrated on behalf of Civil Rights in the '50s and '60s when success was so elusive, managed to influence Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, followed by other laws and Supreme Court decisions. Today such a massive letter-writing, e-mailing, telephoning campaign and movement could overcome the inertia of a sluggish administration and Congress to open remaining files and to re-investigate the John F. Kennedy assassination and other political assassinations.
The American people should not have to live with the untruths and lies and evasions of our political past. Our future generations deserve better than that.
Anyone who is so inclined has my permission to reprint my letter and send it to their local newspaper or news media outlet. I also urge anyone who so wishes to write their own letters to President Obama and their own legislators in the US House and Senate, requesting release of withheld files and honest hearings before the American people.
Adele
Posted with permission from the author. -BK
President Barrack Obama
White House
Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington D.C.
William Kelly
Coalition on Political Assassinations
Washington D.C.
January 25, 2009
Dear President Obama,
While Open Government isn't a category among your administrative "Briefing Books" on the internet, you made it a national priority when, among your first actions as president, you issued Executive Orders regarding the disposition of Presidential Papers and open government and ordered that these issues be addressed and a report issued by May 20, 2009.
In support of Dr. Adele Edisen's plea, many significant government records on the assassination of President Kennedy are still being withheld from the public, despite the JFK Act of 1992 and the work and recommendations of the Assassinations Records Review Board (ARRB). All of the withheld records concern the national security of the United States, some of which are designated to be released in 2017.
The national security of the nation today now depends on these records being released to the public, and a proper and independent investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy, so it can be determined how such a crime could have happened, how it was covered up and what the national security implications are today.
The most significant threat to the national security today is the assassination of the President, and it would not be as signficant a danger today if the issues of the murder of President Kennedy were properly resolved, and it will remain so until the assassination of President Kennedy is resolved.
William Kelly
William Kelly
Friday, January 16, 2009
For MLK Day - Free the Files on his Murder
For MLK Day - Free the Files on his Murder
When asked about MLK Day being a national holiday, the old Southern sheriff says, "Hell, let's kill another nigger and take two days off."
Well now MLK Day is a national holiday, and is the day before the inaguration of the first black American president, calling unprecidented attention to the holiday they ask you to make a day of public service.
If you don't have anything more important scheduled, consider sitting down and writting your Representative in the House and sentators and asking them to pass the MLK Act releasing the MLK Assassination records of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) and hold the mandated oversight hearings on the JFK Act, which has yet to have one hearing since it was passed over fifteen years ago.
With a Democratically controlled Congress, and a new executive administration coming into office, it appeared that the House Reform and Oversight Committee, responsible for such hearings, would actually get around to holding them. Hearings on the proposed MLK Act are actually scheduled for mid-March, during Open Government Sunshine Week, and hearings on the JFK Act would be naturally held at the same time.
But Henry Waxman (D. Calf.), the hardnosed chairman of the House Oversight committee, is moving on, and his replacement, Rep. Edolphus "Ed" Town (D.NY) has already made known his priorities - holding hearings on the NCAA college football playoffs scheme.
The committee has also held hearings on athletes use of steroids, and took sworn public testimony on the issue, and now the Justice Department has responded to the Committee's request and has conveined a Federal Grand Jury to determine if there is enough evidence to indict anyone who testified before the committee for perjury.
The HSCA also asked the Justice Department to investigate new evidence and destroyed records in the assassination of President Kennedy, but no such Federal Grand Jury has been similarly conveined to investigate those crimes.
Lie about taking steroids? They're going to come and get you.
Lie about the evidence in the murder of the president? Nothing.
Well now the House Reform and Oversight Committee is responsible for holding public hearings on the proposed MLK Act and the 15 year old JFK Act, and hasn't done it yet, so why not write a letter to your congressman and senators and ask them why not?
Why haven't there been hearings on such important topic as releasing the government records related to the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. and the President of the United States?
Other, apparently more significant issues like the NCAA college football playoffs and the use of steroids by professional athletes are taking precident over the release of the government's records on the assassinations of President Kennedy and MLK.
But these misplaced priorities can be changed.
They can be changed if people contact their representatives and tell them what's important.
You can begin with Rep. "Ed" Towns (D. NY) who is over 70 years old, has been in Congress for nearly 30 years, is black, comes from a tough hood, and has served on this committee for twenty years, so he knows what's going on.
Apparently Rep. Ed has breakfast Sundays after church at Juniors on Flatbush Avenue, where the cheesecakes are the best and "Lords of Flatbush" hang their colors. Perhaps someone who lives near that neigborhood could mossey on over to Juniors and meet Rep. Ed Town for breakfast and explain to him the necessity of holding hearings on the MLK Act and JFK Act? Any takers?
Or visit him in Washington, a popular destingation of late.
Or visit him on the web, and send him an email.
Let him know you're alive and have an interest in this issue.
http://oversight.house.gov/
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D.NY)
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5051
Towns gets brownie points and a feather for his cap since he has already passed two pieces of legislation that await passage in the Senate and the new President's signature:
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2304
You might even be able to relate with what he has to say. In his first speech as new chairman he said, "We need to quickly end this era of secrecy. This secret approach to government has failed the majority of American people and has led to decisions that beneffit small and elete sectors of our society..." and "...one simple recomendation of properly auditing Defense communications contracts could save over $800 milion dollars alone...."
Chairman Towns Speech on Oversight Priorities
The Willard Hotel, Washington, D.C.
January 14, 2009
OPEN GOVERNMENT TAKES THE SUNDAY MORNING TEST - By Rep. Edolphus Towns
I am pleased to be here this morning to discuss the role of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in the 111th Congress.
We are at a critical juncture in our nation’s history. Last November, the American people did some soul searching and for the second election in a row voted for change—demanding that those unique American ideals we all believe in—freedom, liberty and justice for all—be used to restore our faith in government and our standing to the international community.
I say all this because I am very excited about the role that the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will play in the new Congress working with the incoming administration. I have been a member of this Committee for 26 years – in the majority and the minority, through six chairmen and a few name changes along the way. I have been preparing for this opportunity throughout my entire tenure in Congress and I am ready.
I wanted to take our time here today to share what is going to be a robust agenda for the Committee this year and for this Congress.
Allow me to begin with the word on everyone’s mind—OVERSIGHT.
Let me be clear to everyone — our committee will provide vigorous oversight of the new administration, corporate wrongdoing and other timely issues.
I feel strongly—as does the new President Elect—that Congressional oversight should not go away just because the Administration and Congress are run by the same party. Constructive oversight can expose and solve small challenges before they become national catastrophes. Congress has a responsibility to the citizens of this nation—to be a check on the executive branch.
Looking back, the Republican Congress did the Bush Administration a disservice by turning a blind eye to problems created in the executive branch. At this point, many Republicans would admit and agree on this.....
....Everyone in Washington agrees on the need for government to run more efficiently and restore that trust to our constituents. There certainly is no quick fix or silver bullet but the first step on this journey is to bring more transparency to federal programs, and stop sweeping our problems under the rug—I believe that Americans can in fact handle the truth! AND we need to tell them the truth! It’s not really that complicated—especially when you follow what I like to call the “Sunday Morning Test.”
The Sunday Morning Test is not whether the pundits on Meet the Press or Face the Nation understand and agree with what the government is doing. My Sunday morning test involves my constituents who talk to me after church on Sunday morning or at breakfast at Junior’s on Flatbush Avenue understanding what their government is doing—***And let me state for the record—if you have EVER been to Brooklyn, you know that people are not shy about telling you what is on their minds!!!
But THAT is why I go back home every weekend. I listen to the stories of working people as they share their experiences and concerns about the future of their families, their communities and their country.
One can see pretty quickly how the Sunday Morning Test can help guide our work, making government more understandable and more approachable, which hopefully will encourage more participation in our democracy!
Constructive congressional oversight should be a dialogue between the people’s representatives and their government. That is why I am heartened to have developed a friendship with my ranking member, Congressman Darrell Issa, who is equally committed to working in a bi-partisan fashion for the continued success of the Committee and for the benefit of the American people.
We need to quickly end this era of secrecy. This secret approach to government has failed the majority of American people and has led to decisions that benefited small and elite sectors of our society, with the hope that these benefits would trickle down to the majority of the American people.
We have already made strides in this regard; in our first week, we passed three bills, issued an oversight report, and launched an investigation—AND this is only the beginning.
The very first bills to pass the House were H.R. 35, the Presidential Records Amendments Act, and H.R. 36, the Presidential Library Donation Reform Act. These bills will ensure that records from this and future administrations will be made available to the public in a timely fashion. Presidents must understand that their records, library donors and visitor logs belong to the nation, not simply to the safety deposit box of their choosing.
These two pieces of legislation are a down payment on the types of open government initiatives supported by the public, who in addition to expecting the truth from their government; want a smart, effective government. And....transparency will always be the foundation to success.........All of these pressing matters I’ve shared with you show why leading the Oversight Committee at this critical juncture in history means so much. We have the opportunity to go right to the core of the problems facing our country—Americans are eager to believe again and I for one feel that there is room for all of us to work together to make that a reality.
Thank you for your time this morning.
Rep. Ed Towns Chair.
Subcommitte on:
Information Policy, Census, and National Archives
Jurisdiction includes public information and records laws such as the Freedom of Information Act, the Presidential Records Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Census Bureau, and the National Archives and Records Administration.
Wm. Lacy Clay, Chairman
Paul E. Kanjorski
Carolyn B. Maloney
John A. Yarmuth
Paul W. Hodes
Michael Turner, Ranking Minority Member
Chris Cannon
Bill Sali
Issues and Investigations
As set forth in House Rule X, clause 4, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform may, at any time, conduct investigations of any matter regardless of whether another standing committee has jurisdiction over the matter. In 1998, Rep. Waxman formed the Special Investigations Division to conduct investigations into issues that are important to members of the Oversight Committee and other members of Congress.
Bill Kelly
bkjfk3@yahoo.com
When asked about MLK Day being a national holiday, the old Southern sheriff says, "Hell, let's kill another nigger and take two days off."
Well now MLK Day is a national holiday, and is the day before the inaguration of the first black American president, calling unprecidented attention to the holiday they ask you to make a day of public service.
If you don't have anything more important scheduled, consider sitting down and writting your Representative in the House and sentators and asking them to pass the MLK Act releasing the MLK Assassination records of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) and hold the mandated oversight hearings on the JFK Act, which has yet to have one hearing since it was passed over fifteen years ago.
With a Democratically controlled Congress, and a new executive administration coming into office, it appeared that the House Reform and Oversight Committee, responsible for such hearings, would actually get around to holding them. Hearings on the proposed MLK Act are actually scheduled for mid-March, during Open Government Sunshine Week, and hearings on the JFK Act would be naturally held at the same time.
But Henry Waxman (D. Calf.), the hardnosed chairman of the House Oversight committee, is moving on, and his replacement, Rep. Edolphus "Ed" Town (D.NY) has already made known his priorities - holding hearings on the NCAA college football playoffs scheme.
The committee has also held hearings on athletes use of steroids, and took sworn public testimony on the issue, and now the Justice Department has responded to the Committee's request and has conveined a Federal Grand Jury to determine if there is enough evidence to indict anyone who testified before the committee for perjury.
The HSCA also asked the Justice Department to investigate new evidence and destroyed records in the assassination of President Kennedy, but no such Federal Grand Jury has been similarly conveined to investigate those crimes.
Lie about taking steroids? They're going to come and get you.
Lie about the evidence in the murder of the president? Nothing.
Well now the House Reform and Oversight Committee is responsible for holding public hearings on the proposed MLK Act and the 15 year old JFK Act, and hasn't done it yet, so why not write a letter to your congressman and senators and ask them why not?
Why haven't there been hearings on such important topic as releasing the government records related to the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. and the President of the United States?
Other, apparently more significant issues like the NCAA college football playoffs and the use of steroids by professional athletes are taking precident over the release of the government's records on the assassinations of President Kennedy and MLK.
But these misplaced priorities can be changed.
They can be changed if people contact their representatives and tell them what's important.
You can begin with Rep. "Ed" Towns (D. NY) who is over 70 years old, has been in Congress for nearly 30 years, is black, comes from a tough hood, and has served on this committee for twenty years, so he knows what's going on.
Apparently Rep. Ed has breakfast Sundays after church at Juniors on Flatbush Avenue, where the cheesecakes are the best and "Lords of Flatbush" hang their colors. Perhaps someone who lives near that neigborhood could mossey on over to Juniors and meet Rep. Ed Town for breakfast and explain to him the necessity of holding hearings on the MLK Act and JFK Act? Any takers?
Or visit him in Washington, a popular destingation of late.
Or visit him on the web, and send him an email.
Let him know you're alive and have an interest in this issue.
http://oversight.house.gov/
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D.NY)
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5051
Towns gets brownie points and a feather for his cap since he has already passed two pieces of legislation that await passage in the Senate and the new President's signature:
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2304
You might even be able to relate with what he has to say. In his first speech as new chairman he said, "We need to quickly end this era of secrecy. This secret approach to government has failed the majority of American people and has led to decisions that beneffit small and elete sectors of our society..." and "...one simple recomendation of properly auditing Defense communications contracts could save over $800 milion dollars alone...."
Chairman Towns Speech on Oversight Priorities
The Willard Hotel, Washington, D.C.
January 14, 2009
OPEN GOVERNMENT TAKES THE SUNDAY MORNING TEST - By Rep. Edolphus Towns
I am pleased to be here this morning to discuss the role of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in the 111th Congress.
We are at a critical juncture in our nation’s history. Last November, the American people did some soul searching and for the second election in a row voted for change—demanding that those unique American ideals we all believe in—freedom, liberty and justice for all—be used to restore our faith in government and our standing to the international community.
I say all this because I am very excited about the role that the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will play in the new Congress working with the incoming administration. I have been a member of this Committee for 26 years – in the majority and the minority, through six chairmen and a few name changes along the way. I have been preparing for this opportunity throughout my entire tenure in Congress and I am ready.
I wanted to take our time here today to share what is going to be a robust agenda for the Committee this year and for this Congress.
Allow me to begin with the word on everyone’s mind—OVERSIGHT.
Let me be clear to everyone — our committee will provide vigorous oversight of the new administration, corporate wrongdoing and other timely issues.
I feel strongly—as does the new President Elect—that Congressional oversight should not go away just because the Administration and Congress are run by the same party. Constructive oversight can expose and solve small challenges before they become national catastrophes. Congress has a responsibility to the citizens of this nation—to be a check on the executive branch.
Looking back, the Republican Congress did the Bush Administration a disservice by turning a blind eye to problems created in the executive branch. At this point, many Republicans would admit and agree on this.....
....Everyone in Washington agrees on the need for government to run more efficiently and restore that trust to our constituents. There certainly is no quick fix or silver bullet but the first step on this journey is to bring more transparency to federal programs, and stop sweeping our problems under the rug—I believe that Americans can in fact handle the truth! AND we need to tell them the truth! It’s not really that complicated—especially when you follow what I like to call the “Sunday Morning Test.”
The Sunday Morning Test is not whether the pundits on Meet the Press or Face the Nation understand and agree with what the government is doing. My Sunday morning test involves my constituents who talk to me after church on Sunday morning or at breakfast at Junior’s on Flatbush Avenue understanding what their government is doing—***And let me state for the record—if you have EVER been to Brooklyn, you know that people are not shy about telling you what is on their minds!!!
But THAT is why I go back home every weekend. I listen to the stories of working people as they share their experiences and concerns about the future of their families, their communities and their country.
One can see pretty quickly how the Sunday Morning Test can help guide our work, making government more understandable and more approachable, which hopefully will encourage more participation in our democracy!
Constructive congressional oversight should be a dialogue between the people’s representatives and their government. That is why I am heartened to have developed a friendship with my ranking member, Congressman Darrell Issa, who is equally committed to working in a bi-partisan fashion for the continued success of the Committee and for the benefit of the American people.
We need to quickly end this era of secrecy. This secret approach to government has failed the majority of American people and has led to decisions that benefited small and elite sectors of our society, with the hope that these benefits would trickle down to the majority of the American people.
We have already made strides in this regard; in our first week, we passed three bills, issued an oversight report, and launched an investigation—AND this is only the beginning.
The very first bills to pass the House were H.R. 35, the Presidential Records Amendments Act, and H.R. 36, the Presidential Library Donation Reform Act. These bills will ensure that records from this and future administrations will be made available to the public in a timely fashion. Presidents must understand that their records, library donors and visitor logs belong to the nation, not simply to the safety deposit box of their choosing.
These two pieces of legislation are a down payment on the types of open government initiatives supported by the public, who in addition to expecting the truth from their government; want a smart, effective government. And....transparency will always be the foundation to success.........All of these pressing matters I’ve shared with you show why leading the Oversight Committee at this critical juncture in history means so much. We have the opportunity to go right to the core of the problems facing our country—Americans are eager to believe again and I for one feel that there is room for all of us to work together to make that a reality.
Thank you for your time this morning.
Rep. Ed Towns Chair.
Subcommitte on:
Information Policy, Census, and National Archives
Jurisdiction includes public information and records laws such as the Freedom of Information Act, the Presidential Records Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Census Bureau, and the National Archives and Records Administration.
Wm. Lacy Clay, Chairman
Paul E. Kanjorski
Carolyn B. Maloney
John A. Yarmuth
Paul W. Hodes
Michael Turner, Ranking Minority Member
Chris Cannon
Bill Sali
Issues and Investigations
As set forth in House Rule X, clause 4, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform may, at any time, conduct investigations of any matter regardless of whether another standing committee has jurisdiction over the matter. In 1998, Rep. Waxman formed the Special Investigations Division to conduct investigations into issues that are important to members of the Oversight Committee and other members of Congress.
Bill Kelly
bkjfk3@yahoo.com
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza
The new movie Valkyrie takes its name from the code word for the Nazi generals plot to assassinate Hitler, which resulted in the July 20, 1944 bombing at the Wolf's Lair bunker.(1)
In an article I wrote some years ago I detail how some of those individuals involved in this plot to kill Hitler were also entwined with the events at Dealey Plaza.
[July 20, 1944 - November 22, 1963](2)
What happened at Dealey Plaza was either the work of a lone, deranged madman or a carefully designed and succesfully conducted conspiracy. If a conspiracy, one of my hypothesis is that it was done by those who had done it before and have done it since, serial political assassins. While first instincts took me directly to Guatemala and Cuba, all providing not only scenarios but veterans who are bit players in the Dealey Plaza drama, the July 20, 1944 attempt on Hitler stands out uniquely.
It was Volkmar Schmidt who first mentioned to me in an interview [See: Volkmar Schmidt Interview](3), that he brought up the subject of the Hitler assassination plot with the accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald, at a private party one evening in February of 1963.
Kelly: You mentioned General Walker when you talked with Oswald?
Schmidt: Yes, Professor Kuetemeyer told me you know, to deal with people like this who are disturbed, you have to use empathy, be slightly over zealous yourself to like up with them and that total insanity, towards reality. When I heard how hateful he was towards Kennedy and Cuba, which was kind of irrational, I tried to say "hey, there’s something much more real to be concerned about," because I don’t know about Castro, but I know about this Walker, he’s kind of a Nazi, yea? Not so bad as those Nazis in Germany, but I had specifically mentioned to Lee Harvey Oswald, that Walker had given a speech to the students at the Mississippi campus and those guys went off and killed a couple of journalists....
K: So do you think your conversation with Oswald about Walker may have instigated him to take a pot shot at him?
S: Yes, he did, and naturally it was a terrible responsibility, and for years when I drove past the underpass I literally had to cry because, you know. But I exonerate myself completely because I had the best intent, embarrassed Kennedy, and I certainly didn’t tell him to take a pot shot at him...I may have triggered it. Actually, a few days after I talked with him, he bought his weapons.
As for Volkmar Schmidt's association with those in the plot to kill Hitler, Schmidt mentions Professor Kuetemeyer, who "...was certainly, and many of his friends were in the circle of those who tried to kill Hitler, Stauffenberg, and several of his close friends were executed, and one of the sons of his friends, lived at his house and became and is still a very close friend of mine. Fritz from Holland...Fritz first name Frederick, Von - the symbol of nobility, Von Halen. He was actually arrested before the plot came out. He knew about the plot and was tortured to death. And another gentleman who was involved was Von Trott, a friend of Kuetemeyer." (4)
Also heavilly involved in Valkyrie was one Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius. A Gestapo officer assigned to Switzerland, Gisevius tried to get Allen Dulles, the OSS chief of Bern, to eleminate Hitler, broker a separate peace between Germany and the Western Allies, and fight the Russians together. This plot evolved into the July 20th bomb explosion at the Fuhrer’s “Wolfschanze” bunker headquarters near Rastenburg, Germany. (5)
Col. Claus Schenk Grav von Stauffenberg planted a briefcase bomb under the map table next to Hitler, left the bunker, witnessed the explosion and the flew back to Berlin where he met with Gisevius. Together they drew up press releases to counter Goebel’s propaganda, but when it became clear that the bomb failed to kill Hitler (the heavy wooden table leg saved his life), those responsible were rounded up and executed. Many hundreds, some say thousands were eventually implicated, but somehow, Gisevius went underground and eventually escaped using false identification provided to him by Allen Dulles, though his personal assistant Mary Bancroft. (6)
Mary Bancroft, the stepdaughter of the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, was also Dulles’ mistress at the time, and served as a intermediary between Dulles and Gisevius. As related in her own Autobiography of a Spy Mary Bancroft was a close personal friend of Michael Paine’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young. Their close friendship dated from the 1920s when Ruth Forbes Paine was married to New York architect Lyman Paine, one of the founders of the Trotyskite movment in the U.S. and father of Michael Paine. Bancroft and Ruth Forbes Paine traveled extensively overseas and were together on board an ocean liner when Bancroft met her future husband, a Zurich businessman. Once set up in Switzerland, she hooked up with Dulles.(7)
And once set up in Texas, back from the USSR, Oswald met Volkmar Schmidt and Ruth Hyde Paine at the same party. Schmidt would give Oswald a history lesson, applying the Hitler assassination analogy to General Walker, and Ruth Paine would become Oswald's benefactor.
Just think, Schmidt asked Oswald, how history would have changed if Hitler had been assassinated?
VALKYRIE - The Movie
Now with the Hollywood version of the conspiracy up on the big screen and a certifiable superstar playing the romantic hero Von Stauffenberg, in what's reputed to be a historically faithful script, there's suddenly new interest in this once obscure, failed assassination attempt, and how it's changed history.
July 20, 1944 just doesn't ring as true as December 7th or September 11th, but that was the date Hitler was suppose to die, and because he didn't the world has never been the same. Just think how things would be as equally different today if John F. Kennedy slouched down on his wife's lap instead of taking a bullet to the head, and got out of Dealey Plaza alive? How many people would have been implicated in the conspiracy?
Well, after July 20, 1944, hundreds if not thousands of Germany's elte, often nobel class, including Gen. Rommel, were implicated in the conspiracy, and in some cases, their entire families executed. It is telling that both Wolf's Lair and Dealey Plaza operations were not only political assassinations, but coup d'etats designed to take over the administrative powers of government and change policy, with one being successful and the other not.
While the movie does not appear to be a box office sensation, it is in the popular mainstream, and has garnered favorable reviews, including one by Kurt Loder at MTV News, and the other, by Phil Villarreal.
Loder incorrectly asserts that the Day of the Jackel is fictional, as there really is Carlos the Jackel and there were covert attempts to assassinate DeGaul by the OAS over Algeria. (8)
In his review of the movie, Phil Villarreal notes that "There is a certain satisfaction in watching the plot come together. Amazingly it was actually Hitler who signed off on his own potential death warrent by authorizing changes in a contingency plan that set reserve troops into action to suppress a government takeover. Von Stauffenberg and his confederates wanted to use the troops to stifle the SS after Hitler's death." (9)
Indeed. Besides the characters involved in both Valkyrie and Dealey Plaza, an attribute of the Valkarie plot adapted into the Dealy Plaza plot was a Northwoods false flag variation to blame the assassination on the opposition (the SS and Castro), and having the intended victim actually administratively approve the operation.
They convinced Hitler to alter the contingency plan in a national emeregency, what we now know as the Continunity of Government (COG) to allow for the change in leadership in the event of Hitler's assassination, thus getting him to sign his own death warrent, which he escaped.
Kennedy wasn't as lucky once he was convinced to approve certain (maritime) covert actions against Cuba that were originally congingency plans, and evidently used against him at Dealey Plaza. These specific operations were administratively approved by JFK, but also personally exposed to RFK as the director of the Cuban operations, so he was effectively blackballed from responding to his brother's assassination. (10) [See: JFK Assassination - The Administrative Details ]
Former Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schewiker once said that "there are fingerprints of intelligence" all over the assassination of President Kennedy, and some of those fingerprints are found in other, similar operations. Valkyrie had only been a decade prior to Dealey Plaza, so its quite understandable how the same players could be involved in both, but it also fits nicely into the historicial glove.
Both Valkyrie and Dealy Plaza included getting the victm to sign off on the operations used, and a false flag, Northwoods angle to blame the assassination on the opposition, the SS in Hitler's case, and Castro by framing Oswald as the assassin.
That these facits were built into the Dealey Plaza operation show how complicated it really was, and their similarities give us clues to who was behind it, and shows how it is still effecting us today. Now we have to deal with the contemporary continuation of the same psychological warfare oprations, like those posed by Brothers In Arms and Legacy of Secrecy, both new books about the assassination that mention the Valkarie plot.
In her (January 6, 2008 column) Liz Smith gave Lamar Waldron's Legacy of Secrecy a thumbs up write up, in which she wrote, "YOU MAY WONDER why the FBI and CIA withheld information from the committee. By the time of JFK's murder, dozens of (Carlos)Marcello associates had infiltrated a CIA operation code-named AMWORLD, a project started by JFK himself. Writer Waldron revealed this back in 2005. This was the CIA's top-secret plan to cooperate with Cuba's army commander, Juan Almeida, to stage a coup against Fidel Castro on Dec. 1, 1963. That was 10 days after JFK's trip to Dallas. (The CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff even referred to the World War II plot to kill Hitler as their role model for getting rid of Castro. You can see that story told by Tom Cruise in the new movie 'Valkyrie.')" (11)
Now I'm looking for that reference in Legacy of Secrecy, but it jumped right out at me when I was reading Brothers In Arms.
Knowing there was something going on between Valykrie and Dealey Plaza, I was still taken aback when I read the following passage in Gus Russo's new book Brothers In Arms.
"...But the (Cubala/AM/LASH) plot hurtled forward in hopes of success before the 1964 elections in the U.S. Joseph Califano, of the Pentagon's Cuban Coordinating Committee, was being pressed by Des FitzGerald for all the Defense Department intel he could get on the key Cuban military officers, scoping for a 'mole' within the regime. 52 FitzGerald was about to brief the Joint Chiefs and, although Califano was excluded from the meeting on September 25, Des and the Agency were, according to memos later released, studying how German generals had plotted to kill Hitler, in order to develop a way to organize high-ranking Cuban officers to kill Castro. 53.
(12)
Russo Notes: #52. Califano. p. 124. #53. Califano citing: JCS Memo for the Record, Walter Higgins, "Brifing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on CIA Cuban Operations and Planning," JFK Collection, JCS Papers, J-3, #29, 202-10001-10028, NARA, which Rex Bradford over at the Mary Ferrell Archives has conviently posted on line.
The memo, written by a Col. Higgins, deputy to the late Gen. Krulak,concerned a(Sept. 25, 1963) briefing on Cuban operations given to the Joint Chiefs of Staff by Desmond Fitzgerald. "He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However, he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the military personnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least ten high-level military personnel who are talking with CIA but as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence has not yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot to kill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach." (13)
In the assassination of President Kennedy we find that covert anti-Castro Cuban operations, approved by JFK, and intentionally exposed to RFK, were utilized in the assassination of President Kennedy, thus blackballing RFK from retaliation after the death of JFK.
Looking closely at the specific CIA authorized attacks against Castro that were connected directly to what happened at Dealey Plaza I came up with the June, 1963 Bayo-Pawly raid and the Halloween night attack by the raider mother ship Rex.
[See: JFK Assassinaiton - The Administrative Details ] http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5762
On April Fool's Day, April 1, 1963, those responsible for covert operations against Cuba, the Cuban Coordinating Committee, suggested a number of specific plans to be directed against Castro, some of which were later approved by the President. Some of these specific operations approved by the President, which involved maritime attacks against Cuba from Florida (Bayo/Pawley-Operation Red Cross/the Rex), included agents and operatives who later became entwined in the events of that took place in Dallas.
Lamar Waldron argues that the Mafia dons redirected the plan for a coup in Cuba to kill JFK, while Gus Russo contends that Oswald acted on behalf of Cubans who retaliated in response to the JFK/RFK plots to kill Castro.
(1) Valkyrie the movie. [http://valkyrie-trailer.blogspot.com/]
(2) July 20, 1944-November 22, 1963 [See below]
(3) January, 1995 telepone interview. [http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2008/01/volkmar-schmidt-interview.html]
(4) According to Schmidt, Keutemeyer was also associated with Herr Von Halen and Dr. Adam von Trott zu Solz, both of whom were captured, tortured and executed because of their roles in the failed assassination and coup of July 20, 1944. (For details of their roles Peter Hoffman’s the History of German Resistance, 1933-1944, MIT Press, 1977).
(5) Autobiography of a Spy (William Morrow, 1983), Mary Bancroft
(6) She also helped Gisevius translate his history of the Third Rich, later published as “Bis zum bittern Ende.” (two volumes, Fretz & Wasmuth, Zurich, 1946, 1954; To the Bitter End,” Richard and Clara Winston, Jonathan Cape, London, 1948; Rutten & Loening, Hamburg, (1964).
(7) Autobiography of a Spy, Bancroft.
(8)Kurt Loder Review of Vaklyrie movie [http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1601846/story.jhtml]
(9)Phil Villarreal review of Valkyrie [http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/39380]
(10)See: JFK Coup - The Administrative Details (See below)
[http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5762 ]
(11) [http://www.nypost.com/seven/01062009/gossi...htm?&page=0]
(12) Gus Russo, Stephen Molton, Brothers In Arms - The Kennedys, The Castros, and the Politics of Murder, p. 294 (Bloomsbury, 2008)
(13)Higgins memo on FitzGerald briefing [http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10246&relPageId=5]
(14)
Original article:
JULY 20, 1944 – NOVEMBER 22, 1963
The July 20, 1944 plot to kill Adolph Hitler and the November 22, 1963 assassination of President Kennedy are separated by nearly two decades in time, yet they are entwined by a number of common attributes, indeed some of the same individuals were involved in both dramas.
Dr. Wilhelm Keutemeyer, Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, Mary Bancroft and Allen Dulles were four participants in the July 20, 1944 attempt to kill Hitler who also became players in the Dealey Plaza tragedy.
When Lee Harvey Oswald was identified as a suspect in the assassination, it was immediately determined that he had spent the previous night at the home of Ruth Hyde Paine. How did the Oswalds come to meet the Paines? We learn they met through the seemingly innocent, yet suspicious efforts of a German immigrant, Volkmar Schmidt.
Volkmar Schmidt was at the time an employee of Magnolia Oil Labs and was a friend and associate of George DeMohrenschildt, who encouraged Schmidt to meet Oswald. A party was set up at Schmidt’s house, which he shared with two other young men who worked in the same business, Everitt Glover and the son of one the founders of Radio Free Europe, Richard Pierce.
Schmidt was recruited in Germany by Magnolia Labs, a branch of the Magnolia Oil Company that was originally founded by a man (Little), whose rich widow was bilked by Jim Braden and his sidekick (Pierria.) They were branded “The Honeymooners” when Braden was kicked out of Dallas for vagrancy by Sheriff Bill Decker, when Braden was living at the widow’s Turtle Creek home, and then again when he was taken into custody as a suspicious person at Dealey Plaza. Magnolia was bought up by a bigger fish – Mobil Oil.
Schmidt arranged a party at his place so Michael Paine could meet Oswald, but neither Schmidet nor Michael Paine were there (though Marina did meet Ruth Paine), so a second party was held (February 20) at DeMohrenschilt’s apartment.
According to E. J. Epstein (in Legend, McGraw-Hill, 1978 p.204) and a telephone interview with Volkmar Schmidt (Bill Kelly interview with Volkmar Schmidt – Jan. 1995), it was a monumental meeting for both men.
Sitting across a table from Oswald, Schmidt had a three hour conversation with him and later said that “almost from the moment Oswald began talking about his experiences in the Soviet Union” Schmidt was impressed by Oswald’s “burning dedication” to what he considered “political truth.”
During the course of their conversation Schmidt said he used a “reverse psychology” technique that he had learned in Germany from Professor Wilhelm Kuetemeyer.
“When the conversation turned to the subject of the Kennedy administration, Schmidt expected Oswald would express the usual liberal sentiments about the President’s attempt to bring about constructive reform. Instead, Oswald launched into a violent attack on the President’s foreign policy, citing both the Bay of Pigs in April, 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis of October, 1962 as examples of ‘imperialism’ and ‘interventions.’ He suggested that Kennedy’s actions against Cuba had set the stage for a nuclear holocaust and further, that even after the Soviet missiles had been withdrawn from Cuba, American sponsored acts of sabotage and ‘terrorism’ against Cuba were continuing.”
So Schmidt changed the subject, using a psychological technique learned from Err Professor Kuetemeyer, “He could see that Oswald had extreme and unyielding positions and realized it would do no good to argue with him. Instead, he tried to win his confidence by appearing to be in sympathy with its political views and making even more extreme statements.”
“In an intentionally melodramatic way Schmidt brought up the subject of General Edwin A. Walker, who had been forced to resign from the Army because of his open support for the John Birch Society and other right wing extremist causes. (Schmidt) suggested that Walker’s hate-mongering activities at the University of Mississippi, which the federal government was then trying to desegregate, were directly responsible for the riots and bloodshed – including the deaths of two reporters on that campus. He compared Walker with Hitler and said that they should be treated as murders at large.”
“Oswald instantly seized on the analogy between Hitler and Walker to argue that America was moving towards fascism. As he spoke, he seemed to grow more and more excited about the subject. Schmidt could see he finally got through to Oswald. As he listened to Oswald define more closely his political ideas, he began to work out his ‘Psychological Profile,’ as he called it. Oswald seemed to be a ‘totally alienated individual,’ obsessed with political ideology and bent on self-destruction. Even then, he reminded Schmidt of a Dostoevskian character impelled by his own reasoning towards a ‘logical suicide.’”
Though unknown to Schmidt, within days of their conversation Oswald would order the rifle that was allegedly used to shoot at Walker and kill the President.
“When he returned home that night, Schmidt thought that he might be able to help Oswald if he could ‘get him out of his shell,’ He thought of arranging a small party for him where he could meet and talk with other people interested in political ideas. He particularly wanted (Oswald) to meet Michael Paine, an inventor and ‘creative genius’ at Bell Helicopter (whose father, George Lyman Paine, had been one of the leaders of the Trotskyite movement in the United States), and the two men with whom he shared a house in Dallas: Everett Glover and Richard Pierce.”
So they have a party, and while neither Schmidt nor Michael Paine were present, Ruth Paine met Marina Oswald and became fast friends, though it would take a while longer for Michael Paine to meet Lee Harvey Oswald.
In a footnote, (p. 353), Epstein notes: “Kuetemeyer had been experimenting, according to Schmidt, on a group of schidoids during World War II. The experiments had been interrupted in 1944, when Kuetemeyer had become involved in the plot to assassinate Hitler and had been forced into hiding from the Nazis.”
Dr. Whilhelm Keutemeyer was a professor of psychosomatic medicine and religion at the University of Heidelberg, Germany. Keutemeyer’s son was Volkmar Schmidt’s best friend, and Schmidt looked to Keutemeyer as a surrogate father figure. Keutemeyer was also a colleague of Swiss psychoanalysist Carl Jung, who attempted to use his professional associations in attempts to influence Hitler’s behavior. When that failed they just tried to kill him.
Also involved was one Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, a Gestapo officer assigned to Switzerland, who tried to get the OSS chief of Bern, Allen Dulles, to broker a separate peace between Germany and the Western Allies, without Hitler, to fight the Russians together. This plot evolved into the July 20th bomb explosion at the Fuhrer’s “Wolfschanze” bunker headquarters near Rastenburg, Germany.
Col. Claus Schenk Grav von Stauffenberg planted a briefcase bomb under the map table next to Hitler, left the bunker, witnessed the explosion and the flew back to Berlin where he met with Gisevius. Together they drew up press releases to counter Goebel’s propaganda, but when it became clear that the bomb failed to kill Hitler (the heavy wooden table leg saved his life), those responsible were rounded up and executed. Many hundreds, some say thousands were eventually implicated, but somehow, Gisevius went underground and eventually escaped using false identification provided to him by Allen Dulles, though his personal assistant Mary Bancroft.
Mary Bancroft, the stepdaughter of the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, was also Dulles’ mistress at the time, and served as a intermediary between Dulles and Gisevius. She also helped Gisevius translate his history of the Third Rich, later published as “Bis zum bittern Ende.” (two volumes, Fretz & Wasmuth, Zurich, 1946, 1954; To the Bitter End,” Richard and Clara Winston, Jonathan Cape, London, 1948; Rutten & Loening, Hamburg, (1964).
As related in her own “Autobiography of a Spy” (William Morrow, 1983), Mary Bancroft was a close personal friend of Michael Paine’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young. Their intimate friendship dated from the 1920s when Ruth Forbes Paine was married to New York architect Lyman Paine, one of the founders of the Trotyskite movment in the U.S. and father of Michael Paine. Bancroft and Ruth Forbes Paine traveled extensively overseas and were together on board an ocean liner when Bancroft met her future husband, a Zurich businessman.
Hans Bernd Gisevius was called to testify for the defense at the Nurenberg trials, but instead of aiding them, he helped send the Nazis to the gallows. He then came to America where Allen Dulles provided him with a $5,000 a month retainer and set him up in the home of his CIA deputy Tom Braden. At the time Braden was head of the International Organizations Division (IOD), and his assistant was Cord Meyer, Jr., who would later take his place. Cord Meyer, Jr. was the co-founder of the World Federalists, which also included it’s Philadelphia adherents, Michael’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young and Priscilla Johnson McMillan, when she was a student at Bryn Mawr.
So there you have it - Dr. Wilhelm Keutemeyer, Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, Mary Bancroft and Allen Dulles, four direct participants in the July 20, 1944 Hitler assassination attempt and failed coup d’etat, who also became associated with the events that culminated in what happened at Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
The main difference between the two events is that the July 20, 1944 plot failed, and those responsible or even remotely associated with it were rounded up and executed without trial, while the November 22, 1963 succeeded and those responsible assumed command.
(3) See: Volkmar Schmidt Inteview.
JCS Memo For The Record - Sept. 25, 1963
Russo Notes:
#52. Califano. p. 124.
#53. Califano citing: JCS Memo for the Record, Walter Higgins, "Brifing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on CIA Cuban Operations and Planning," JFK Collection, JCS Papers, J-3, #29, 202-10001-10028, NARA.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=5
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR
COUNTERINSURGENCY AND SPECIAL ACTIVITY
25 September 1963
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
Subject: Briefing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on
CIA Cuban Operations and Planning
• 1. At the JCS meeting at 1400 on 25 September, Mr. Desmond FitzGerald briefed the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
• 2. Except for General Taylor and Admiral McDonald, the Joint Chiefs were present, as were the Directors and Secretariat. Colonel Higgins from SACSA was the only other officer in attendance.
• 3. General LeMay opened the meeting by referring to papers recently discussed by the Joint Chiefs on policy and actions concerning military support of the CIA for operations against Cuba. General LeMay expressed the JCS position as had been reflected in the memoranda to Mr. Vance which in effect is that the Joint Chiefs do not believe that the operations to date are of a size and importance enough to justify the use of military support for protection.
• 4. Mr. FitzGerald then discussed his personal feelings as to changed conditions in Cuba. Essentially, he believes that Castro's hold in Cuba has been seriously weakened since last July. He believes that the minor raids conducted by the CIA have contributed to this deterioration in Castro's influence and stability. He is firmly convinced that Castro will fall at some future, not too distant, date, and that such actions as the CIA are conducting, as well as those of exiles, are contributing to unrest and unsettlement.
• 5. Mr. FitzGerald, in commenting upon criteria as to when the military support should be provided, offered the following. The greatest danger from his point of view is that the mother ships may be captured rather than be sunk. This will result in the capture of crewmen who have too much information and which could result in dangerous publicity for the United States. The location of these raids contributes to the possibility of capture. Hence, only when the raids are conducted in the more vulnerable areas from that point of view, is it likely that the CIA will request military support. He further stated that CIA has no intention of requesting aid for the coming raid.
• 6. General LeMay questioned the danger of capture in view of the capabilities of Cubans and ridiculed the idea that small motor boats should have the capability of such a ship.
• 7. General LeMay and others gave opinions concerning such technicalities as the capability of radar both on land and in the air, capability of ship radar of the U.S. and Cuba, the speed of the mother ship, which was cited as 10 to 12 knots, and other related items.
• 8. Mr. FitzGerald made much of the Cuban volatile nature. He cited that many Cubans are now walking with their heads up and alert because of the realization that there are possibilities of raids and other outside supports, such as the light aircraft raids. He voiced the opinion that Castro would probably take desperate measures as his situation further deteriorates and would turn to creating revolutions in Latin America. He stated that even though his operations may be considered only minor, he thought they were doing about as much as could be done under the present policies. One of his problems was that he felt there was only a total of 50 logical targets and if he conducted as many as 10 raids a month, he would be unable to sustain the build-up of Cuban hopes. He further stated that there were times when certain types of raids were more favorable than others; for instance, on sugar centrals.
• 9. In responding to the question concerning the non-attributality of U.S. equipment, he stated that all equipment they use could be bought on the open market in many countries, even though it was of American origin. He stated that intelligence was not as good yet as they would like to have; however, they are having greater success in having agents enter and depart Cuba.
• 10. General Wheeler injected that he sympathizes with such planners as Mr. FitzGerald because he realizes that many good ideas are never accepted by the cautious policy makers. However, Mr. FitzGerald reported that he believes he had a clearer go-ahead on these operations than he has ever had in his past experience.
• 11. Mr. FitzGerald said that over the next two or three months his plans include critical targets of three classes: electrical systems, sugar centrals, and oil. He cited that electrical systems, although a top priority and a key to the economy, were very difficult targets. The sugar centrals were only of a seasonal nature because unless hit at the peak season, they could be repaired without difficulty or loss of time. In regard to oil, the refineries are most important but were also toughest to hit.
• 12. In response to a comment by General Shoup regarding the sabotage of mines Mr. FitzGerald said there had been a recent case of internal sabotage in a mine. He then explained how the success of his operations can only be measured when internal sabotage is increased. In response to a question, he admitted that there was not any coordination as yet with the internal sabotage program.
• 13. He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However, he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the military personnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least ten high-level military personnel who are talking with CIA but as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence has not yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot to kill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach.
• 14. General LeMay then questioned the advisability of utilizing a communication technique to install a radio capability which would permit break-in on Castro broadcasts. He stated that an Air Force officer named McElroy was available to talk to Mr. FitzGerald on the matter, and Mr. FitzGerald accepted this offer.
• 15. The conference closed with General LeMay directing that Mr. FitzGerald's planners meet with General Krulak's people and work out the details as to how the military can assist in supporting these operations. After Mr. FitzGerald departed, General LeMay gave added directions to Colonel Higgins to initiate necessary steps for planning.
• 16. After the JCS meeting Admiral Riley called Colonel Higgins into his office and read a letter from Mr. McGeorge Bundy which discussed secrecy measures necessary related to Cuba CIA operations. Admiral Riley directed Colonel Higgins to have the nature of this letter put out through SACSA control to SACSA contact points to insure an adequate system for secrecy within the military services. Admiral Riley stated he was returning the letter to Mr. Gilpatric as he did not want written communication by SACSA, but to put this out orally. This was transmitted to Colonel Wyman who will take the action to prepare an appropriate memorandum for the record to be filed with General Ingelido in accordance with further direction by Admiral Riley.
• 17. General Wheeler, Chief of Staff of the Army, called and questioned us concerning SACSA's access for the knowledge of such operations as mentioned in the McGeorge Bundy letter. I advised him that our Pendulum system was in being but that I would look into it in greater detail to determine that it met the letter as well as the spirit of the memorandum. I stated I believed this was so but had not had reason to do it until this date and therefore did not give him a positive answer at that time.
WALTER M. HIGGINS, JR.
• Colonel, USA
Posted by Bill Kelly at 10:20 AM
1 comments:
Tim Fleming said...
Fascinating stuff, but you left out one other diabolical connection--Walter Dornberger, head of Hitler's V-2 rocket program at Peenemunde during WWII. He escaped to America through the auspices of Dulles' Operation Paperclip, and, lo and behold, got a job with Bell Helicopter, working for Micahel Paine. It is widely suspected that the call to Dallas Police fingering Oswald, just 15 minutes after the gunfire died down at Dealey Plaza's Valkyrie, came from someone at Bell Helicopter.
Tim Fleming
author "Murder of an American Nazi"
eloquentbooks.com
leftlooking.blogspot.com
November 28, 2008 2:42 PM
In an article I wrote some years ago I detail how some of those individuals involved in this plot to kill Hitler were also entwined with the events at Dealey Plaza.
[July 20, 1944 - November 22, 1963](2)
What happened at Dealey Plaza was either the work of a lone, deranged madman or a carefully designed and succesfully conducted conspiracy. If a conspiracy, one of my hypothesis is that it was done by those who had done it before and have done it since, serial political assassins. While first instincts took me directly to Guatemala and Cuba, all providing not only scenarios but veterans who are bit players in the Dealey Plaza drama, the July 20, 1944 attempt on Hitler stands out uniquely.
It was Volkmar Schmidt who first mentioned to me in an interview [See: Volkmar Schmidt Interview](3), that he brought up the subject of the Hitler assassination plot with the accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald, at a private party one evening in February of 1963.
Kelly: You mentioned General Walker when you talked with Oswald?
Schmidt: Yes, Professor Kuetemeyer told me you know, to deal with people like this who are disturbed, you have to use empathy, be slightly over zealous yourself to like up with them and that total insanity, towards reality. When I heard how hateful he was towards Kennedy and Cuba, which was kind of irrational, I tried to say "hey, there’s something much more real to be concerned about," because I don’t know about Castro, but I know about this Walker, he’s kind of a Nazi, yea? Not so bad as those Nazis in Germany, but I had specifically mentioned to Lee Harvey Oswald, that Walker had given a speech to the students at the Mississippi campus and those guys went off and killed a couple of journalists....
K: So do you think your conversation with Oswald about Walker may have instigated him to take a pot shot at him?
S: Yes, he did, and naturally it was a terrible responsibility, and for years when I drove past the underpass I literally had to cry because, you know. But I exonerate myself completely because I had the best intent, embarrassed Kennedy, and I certainly didn’t tell him to take a pot shot at him...I may have triggered it. Actually, a few days after I talked with him, he bought his weapons.
As for Volkmar Schmidt's association with those in the plot to kill Hitler, Schmidt mentions Professor Kuetemeyer, who "...was certainly, and many of his friends were in the circle of those who tried to kill Hitler, Stauffenberg, and several of his close friends were executed, and one of the sons of his friends, lived at his house and became and is still a very close friend of mine. Fritz from Holland...Fritz first name Frederick, Von - the symbol of nobility, Von Halen. He was actually arrested before the plot came out. He knew about the plot and was tortured to death. And another gentleman who was involved was Von Trott, a friend of Kuetemeyer." (4)
Also heavilly involved in Valkyrie was one Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius. A Gestapo officer assigned to Switzerland, Gisevius tried to get Allen Dulles, the OSS chief of Bern, to eleminate Hitler, broker a separate peace between Germany and the Western Allies, and fight the Russians together. This plot evolved into the July 20th bomb explosion at the Fuhrer’s “Wolfschanze” bunker headquarters near Rastenburg, Germany. (5)
Col. Claus Schenk Grav von Stauffenberg planted a briefcase bomb under the map table next to Hitler, left the bunker, witnessed the explosion and the flew back to Berlin where he met with Gisevius. Together they drew up press releases to counter Goebel’s propaganda, but when it became clear that the bomb failed to kill Hitler (the heavy wooden table leg saved his life), those responsible were rounded up and executed. Many hundreds, some say thousands were eventually implicated, but somehow, Gisevius went underground and eventually escaped using false identification provided to him by Allen Dulles, though his personal assistant Mary Bancroft. (6)
Mary Bancroft, the stepdaughter of the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, was also Dulles’ mistress at the time, and served as a intermediary between Dulles and Gisevius. As related in her own Autobiography of a Spy Mary Bancroft was a close personal friend of Michael Paine’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young. Their close friendship dated from the 1920s when Ruth Forbes Paine was married to New York architect Lyman Paine, one of the founders of the Trotyskite movment in the U.S. and father of Michael Paine. Bancroft and Ruth Forbes Paine traveled extensively overseas and were together on board an ocean liner when Bancroft met her future husband, a Zurich businessman. Once set up in Switzerland, she hooked up with Dulles.(7)
And once set up in Texas, back from the USSR, Oswald met Volkmar Schmidt and Ruth Hyde Paine at the same party. Schmidt would give Oswald a history lesson, applying the Hitler assassination analogy to General Walker, and Ruth Paine would become Oswald's benefactor.
Just think, Schmidt asked Oswald, how history would have changed if Hitler had been assassinated?
VALKYRIE - The Movie
Now with the Hollywood version of the conspiracy up on the big screen and a certifiable superstar playing the romantic hero Von Stauffenberg, in what's reputed to be a historically faithful script, there's suddenly new interest in this once obscure, failed assassination attempt, and how it's changed history.
July 20, 1944 just doesn't ring as true as December 7th or September 11th, but that was the date Hitler was suppose to die, and because he didn't the world has never been the same. Just think how things would be as equally different today if John F. Kennedy slouched down on his wife's lap instead of taking a bullet to the head, and got out of Dealey Plaza alive? How many people would have been implicated in the conspiracy?
Well, after July 20, 1944, hundreds if not thousands of Germany's elte, often nobel class, including Gen. Rommel, were implicated in the conspiracy, and in some cases, their entire families executed. It is telling that both Wolf's Lair and Dealey Plaza operations were not only political assassinations, but coup d'etats designed to take over the administrative powers of government and change policy, with one being successful and the other not.
While the movie does not appear to be a box office sensation, it is in the popular mainstream, and has garnered favorable reviews, including one by Kurt Loder at MTV News, and the other, by Phil Villarreal.
Loder incorrectly asserts that the Day of the Jackel is fictional, as there really is Carlos the Jackel and there were covert attempts to assassinate DeGaul by the OAS over Algeria. (8)
In his review of the movie, Phil Villarreal notes that "There is a certain satisfaction in watching the plot come together. Amazingly it was actually Hitler who signed off on his own potential death warrent by authorizing changes in a contingency plan that set reserve troops into action to suppress a government takeover. Von Stauffenberg and his confederates wanted to use the troops to stifle the SS after Hitler's death." (9)
Indeed. Besides the characters involved in both Valkyrie and Dealey Plaza, an attribute of the Valkarie plot adapted into the Dealy Plaza plot was a Northwoods false flag variation to blame the assassination on the opposition (the SS and Castro), and having the intended victim actually administratively approve the operation.
They convinced Hitler to alter the contingency plan in a national emeregency, what we now know as the Continunity of Government (COG) to allow for the change in leadership in the event of Hitler's assassination, thus getting him to sign his own death warrent, which he escaped.
Kennedy wasn't as lucky once he was convinced to approve certain (maritime) covert actions against Cuba that were originally congingency plans, and evidently used against him at Dealey Plaza. These specific operations were administratively approved by JFK, but also personally exposed to RFK as the director of the Cuban operations, so he was effectively blackballed from responding to his brother's assassination. (10) [See: JFK Assassination - The Administrative Details ]
Former Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schewiker once said that "there are fingerprints of intelligence" all over the assassination of President Kennedy, and some of those fingerprints are found in other, similar operations. Valkyrie had only been a decade prior to Dealey Plaza, so its quite understandable how the same players could be involved in both, but it also fits nicely into the historicial glove.
Both Valkyrie and Dealy Plaza included getting the victm to sign off on the operations used, and a false flag, Northwoods angle to blame the assassination on the opposition, the SS in Hitler's case, and Castro by framing Oswald as the assassin.
That these facits were built into the Dealey Plaza operation show how complicated it really was, and their similarities give us clues to who was behind it, and shows how it is still effecting us today. Now we have to deal with the contemporary continuation of the same psychological warfare oprations, like those posed by Brothers In Arms and Legacy of Secrecy, both new books about the assassination that mention the Valkarie plot.
In her (January 6, 2008 column) Liz Smith gave Lamar Waldron's Legacy of Secrecy a thumbs up write up, in which she wrote, "YOU MAY WONDER why the FBI and CIA withheld information from the committee. By the time of JFK's murder, dozens of (Carlos)Marcello associates had infiltrated a CIA operation code-named AMWORLD, a project started by JFK himself. Writer Waldron revealed this back in 2005. This was the CIA's top-secret plan to cooperate with Cuba's army commander, Juan Almeida, to stage a coup against Fidel Castro on Dec. 1, 1963. That was 10 days after JFK's trip to Dallas. (The CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff even referred to the World War II plot to kill Hitler as their role model for getting rid of Castro. You can see that story told by Tom Cruise in the new movie 'Valkyrie.')" (11)
Now I'm looking for that reference in Legacy of Secrecy, but it jumped right out at me when I was reading Brothers In Arms.
Knowing there was something going on between Valykrie and Dealey Plaza, I was still taken aback when I read the following passage in Gus Russo's new book Brothers In Arms.
"...But the (Cubala/AM/LASH) plot hurtled forward in hopes of success before the 1964 elections in the U.S. Joseph Califano, of the Pentagon's Cuban Coordinating Committee, was being pressed by Des FitzGerald for all the Defense Department intel he could get on the key Cuban military officers, scoping for a 'mole' within the regime. 52 FitzGerald was about to brief the Joint Chiefs and, although Califano was excluded from the meeting on September 25, Des and the Agency were, according to memos later released, studying how German generals had plotted to kill Hitler, in order to develop a way to organize high-ranking Cuban officers to kill Castro. 53.
(12)
Russo Notes: #52. Califano. p. 124. #53. Califano citing: JCS Memo for the Record, Walter Higgins, "Brifing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on CIA Cuban Operations and Planning," JFK Collection, JCS Papers, J-3, #29, 202-10001-10028, NARA, which Rex Bradford over at the Mary Ferrell Archives has conviently posted on line.
The memo, written by a Col. Higgins, deputy to the late Gen. Krulak,concerned a(Sept. 25, 1963) briefing on Cuban operations given to the Joint Chiefs of Staff by Desmond Fitzgerald. "He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However, he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the military personnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least ten high-level military personnel who are talking with CIA but as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence has not yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot to kill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach." (13)
In the assassination of President Kennedy we find that covert anti-Castro Cuban operations, approved by JFK, and intentionally exposed to RFK, were utilized in the assassination of President Kennedy, thus blackballing RFK from retaliation after the death of JFK.
Looking closely at the specific CIA authorized attacks against Castro that were connected directly to what happened at Dealey Plaza I came up with the June, 1963 Bayo-Pawly raid and the Halloween night attack by the raider mother ship Rex.
[See: JFK Assassinaiton - The Administrative Details ] http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5762
On April Fool's Day, April 1, 1963, those responsible for covert operations against Cuba, the Cuban Coordinating Committee, suggested a number of specific plans to be directed against Castro, some of which were later approved by the President. Some of these specific operations approved by the President, which involved maritime attacks against Cuba from Florida (Bayo/Pawley-Operation Red Cross/the Rex), included agents and operatives who later became entwined in the events of that took place in Dallas.
Lamar Waldron argues that the Mafia dons redirected the plan for a coup in Cuba to kill JFK, while Gus Russo contends that Oswald acted on behalf of Cubans who retaliated in response to the JFK/RFK plots to kill Castro.
(1) Valkyrie the movie. [http://valkyrie-trailer.blogspot.com/]
(2) July 20, 1944-November 22, 1963 [See below]
(3) January, 1995 telepone interview. [http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2008/01/volkmar-schmidt-interview.html]
(4) According to Schmidt, Keutemeyer was also associated with Herr Von Halen and Dr. Adam von Trott zu Solz, both of whom were captured, tortured and executed because of their roles in the failed assassination and coup of July 20, 1944. (For details of their roles Peter Hoffman’s the History of German Resistance, 1933-1944, MIT Press, 1977).
(5) Autobiography of a Spy (William Morrow, 1983), Mary Bancroft
(6) She also helped Gisevius translate his history of the Third Rich, later published as “Bis zum bittern Ende.” (two volumes, Fretz & Wasmuth, Zurich, 1946, 1954; To the Bitter End,” Richard and Clara Winston, Jonathan Cape, London, 1948; Rutten & Loening, Hamburg, (1964).
(7) Autobiography of a Spy, Bancroft.
(8)Kurt Loder Review of Vaklyrie movie [http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1601846/story.jhtml]
(9)Phil Villarreal review of Valkyrie [http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/39380]
(10)See: JFK Coup - The Administrative Details (See below)
[http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5762 ]
(11) [http://www.nypost.com/seven/01062009/gossi...htm?&page=0]
(12) Gus Russo, Stephen Molton, Brothers In Arms - The Kennedys, The Castros, and the Politics of Murder, p. 294 (Bloomsbury, 2008)
(13)Higgins memo on FitzGerald briefing [http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10246&relPageId=5]
(14)
Original article:
JULY 20, 1944 – NOVEMBER 22, 1963
The July 20, 1944 plot to kill Adolph Hitler and the November 22, 1963 assassination of President Kennedy are separated by nearly two decades in time, yet they are entwined by a number of common attributes, indeed some of the same individuals were involved in both dramas.
Dr. Wilhelm Keutemeyer, Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, Mary Bancroft and Allen Dulles were four participants in the July 20, 1944 attempt to kill Hitler who also became players in the Dealey Plaza tragedy.
When Lee Harvey Oswald was identified as a suspect in the assassination, it was immediately determined that he had spent the previous night at the home of Ruth Hyde Paine. How did the Oswalds come to meet the Paines? We learn they met through the seemingly innocent, yet suspicious efforts of a German immigrant, Volkmar Schmidt.
Volkmar Schmidt was at the time an employee of Magnolia Oil Labs and was a friend and associate of George DeMohrenschildt, who encouraged Schmidt to meet Oswald. A party was set up at Schmidt’s house, which he shared with two other young men who worked in the same business, Everitt Glover and the son of one the founders of Radio Free Europe, Richard Pierce.
Schmidt was recruited in Germany by Magnolia Labs, a branch of the Magnolia Oil Company that was originally founded by a man (Little), whose rich widow was bilked by Jim Braden and his sidekick (Pierria.) They were branded “The Honeymooners” when Braden was kicked out of Dallas for vagrancy by Sheriff Bill Decker, when Braden was living at the widow’s Turtle Creek home, and then again when he was taken into custody as a suspicious person at Dealey Plaza. Magnolia was bought up by a bigger fish – Mobil Oil.
Schmidt arranged a party at his place so Michael Paine could meet Oswald, but neither Schmidet nor Michael Paine were there (though Marina did meet Ruth Paine), so a second party was held (February 20) at DeMohrenschilt’s apartment.
According to E. J. Epstein (in Legend, McGraw-Hill, 1978 p.204) and a telephone interview with Volkmar Schmidt (Bill Kelly interview with Volkmar Schmidt – Jan. 1995), it was a monumental meeting for both men.
Sitting across a table from Oswald, Schmidt had a three hour conversation with him and later said that “almost from the moment Oswald began talking about his experiences in the Soviet Union” Schmidt was impressed by Oswald’s “burning dedication” to what he considered “political truth.”
During the course of their conversation Schmidt said he used a “reverse psychology” technique that he had learned in Germany from Professor Wilhelm Kuetemeyer.
“When the conversation turned to the subject of the Kennedy administration, Schmidt expected Oswald would express the usual liberal sentiments about the President’s attempt to bring about constructive reform. Instead, Oswald launched into a violent attack on the President’s foreign policy, citing both the Bay of Pigs in April, 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis of October, 1962 as examples of ‘imperialism’ and ‘interventions.’ He suggested that Kennedy’s actions against Cuba had set the stage for a nuclear holocaust and further, that even after the Soviet missiles had been withdrawn from Cuba, American sponsored acts of sabotage and ‘terrorism’ against Cuba were continuing.”
So Schmidt changed the subject, using a psychological technique learned from Err Professor Kuetemeyer, “He could see that Oswald had extreme and unyielding positions and realized it would do no good to argue with him. Instead, he tried to win his confidence by appearing to be in sympathy with its political views and making even more extreme statements.”
“In an intentionally melodramatic way Schmidt brought up the subject of General Edwin A. Walker, who had been forced to resign from the Army because of his open support for the John Birch Society and other right wing extremist causes. (Schmidt) suggested that Walker’s hate-mongering activities at the University of Mississippi, which the federal government was then trying to desegregate, were directly responsible for the riots and bloodshed – including the deaths of two reporters on that campus. He compared Walker with Hitler and said that they should be treated as murders at large.”
“Oswald instantly seized on the analogy between Hitler and Walker to argue that America was moving towards fascism. As he spoke, he seemed to grow more and more excited about the subject. Schmidt could see he finally got through to Oswald. As he listened to Oswald define more closely his political ideas, he began to work out his ‘Psychological Profile,’ as he called it. Oswald seemed to be a ‘totally alienated individual,’ obsessed with political ideology and bent on self-destruction. Even then, he reminded Schmidt of a Dostoevskian character impelled by his own reasoning towards a ‘logical suicide.’”
Though unknown to Schmidt, within days of their conversation Oswald would order the rifle that was allegedly used to shoot at Walker and kill the President.
“When he returned home that night, Schmidt thought that he might be able to help Oswald if he could ‘get him out of his shell,’ He thought of arranging a small party for him where he could meet and talk with other people interested in political ideas. He particularly wanted (Oswald) to meet Michael Paine, an inventor and ‘creative genius’ at Bell Helicopter (whose father, George Lyman Paine, had been one of the leaders of the Trotskyite movement in the United States), and the two men with whom he shared a house in Dallas: Everett Glover and Richard Pierce.”
So they have a party, and while neither Schmidt nor Michael Paine were present, Ruth Paine met Marina Oswald and became fast friends, though it would take a while longer for Michael Paine to meet Lee Harvey Oswald.
In a footnote, (p. 353), Epstein notes: “Kuetemeyer had been experimenting, according to Schmidt, on a group of schidoids during World War II. The experiments had been interrupted in 1944, when Kuetemeyer had become involved in the plot to assassinate Hitler and had been forced into hiding from the Nazis.”
Dr. Whilhelm Keutemeyer was a professor of psychosomatic medicine and religion at the University of Heidelberg, Germany. Keutemeyer’s son was Volkmar Schmidt’s best friend, and Schmidt looked to Keutemeyer as a surrogate father figure. Keutemeyer was also a colleague of Swiss psychoanalysist Carl Jung, who attempted to use his professional associations in attempts to influence Hitler’s behavior. When that failed they just tried to kill him.
Also involved was one Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, a Gestapo officer assigned to Switzerland, who tried to get the OSS chief of Bern, Allen Dulles, to broker a separate peace between Germany and the Western Allies, without Hitler, to fight the Russians together. This plot evolved into the July 20th bomb explosion at the Fuhrer’s “Wolfschanze” bunker headquarters near Rastenburg, Germany.
Col. Claus Schenk Grav von Stauffenberg planted a briefcase bomb under the map table next to Hitler, left the bunker, witnessed the explosion and the flew back to Berlin where he met with Gisevius. Together they drew up press releases to counter Goebel’s propaganda, but when it became clear that the bomb failed to kill Hitler (the heavy wooden table leg saved his life), those responsible were rounded up and executed. Many hundreds, some say thousands were eventually implicated, but somehow, Gisevius went underground and eventually escaped using false identification provided to him by Allen Dulles, though his personal assistant Mary Bancroft.
Mary Bancroft, the stepdaughter of the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, was also Dulles’ mistress at the time, and served as a intermediary between Dulles and Gisevius. She also helped Gisevius translate his history of the Third Rich, later published as “Bis zum bittern Ende.” (two volumes, Fretz & Wasmuth, Zurich, 1946, 1954; To the Bitter End,” Richard and Clara Winston, Jonathan Cape, London, 1948; Rutten & Loening, Hamburg, (1964).
As related in her own “Autobiography of a Spy” (William Morrow, 1983), Mary Bancroft was a close personal friend of Michael Paine’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young. Their intimate friendship dated from the 1920s when Ruth Forbes Paine was married to New York architect Lyman Paine, one of the founders of the Trotyskite movment in the U.S. and father of Michael Paine. Bancroft and Ruth Forbes Paine traveled extensively overseas and were together on board an ocean liner when Bancroft met her future husband, a Zurich businessman.
Hans Bernd Gisevius was called to testify for the defense at the Nurenberg trials, but instead of aiding them, he helped send the Nazis to the gallows. He then came to America where Allen Dulles provided him with a $5,000 a month retainer and set him up in the home of his CIA deputy Tom Braden. At the time Braden was head of the International Organizations Division (IOD), and his assistant was Cord Meyer, Jr., who would later take his place. Cord Meyer, Jr. was the co-founder of the World Federalists, which also included it’s Philadelphia adherents, Michael’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young and Priscilla Johnson McMillan, when she was a student at Bryn Mawr.
So there you have it - Dr. Wilhelm Keutemeyer, Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, Mary Bancroft and Allen Dulles, four direct participants in the July 20, 1944 Hitler assassination attempt and failed coup d’etat, who also became associated with the events that culminated in what happened at Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
The main difference between the two events is that the July 20, 1944 plot failed, and those responsible or even remotely associated with it were rounded up and executed without trial, while the November 22, 1963 succeeded and those responsible assumed command.
(3) See: Volkmar Schmidt Inteview.
JCS Memo For The Record - Sept. 25, 1963
Russo Notes:
#52. Califano. p. 124.
#53. Califano citing: JCS Memo for the Record, Walter Higgins, "Brifing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on CIA Cuban Operations and Planning," JFK Collection, JCS Papers, J-3, #29, 202-10001-10028, NARA.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=5
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR
COUNTERINSURGENCY AND SPECIAL ACTIVITY
25 September 1963
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
Subject: Briefing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on
CIA Cuban Operations and Planning
• 1. At the JCS meeting at 1400 on 25 September, Mr. Desmond FitzGerald briefed the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
• 2. Except for General Taylor and Admiral McDonald, the Joint Chiefs were present, as were the Directors and Secretariat. Colonel Higgins from SACSA was the only other officer in attendance.
• 3. General LeMay opened the meeting by referring to papers recently discussed by the Joint Chiefs on policy and actions concerning military support of the CIA for operations against Cuba. General LeMay expressed the JCS position as had been reflected in the memoranda to Mr. Vance which in effect is that the Joint Chiefs do not believe that the operations to date are of a size and importance enough to justify the use of military support for protection.
• 4. Mr. FitzGerald then discussed his personal feelings as to changed conditions in Cuba. Essentially, he believes that Castro's hold in Cuba has been seriously weakened since last July. He believes that the minor raids conducted by the CIA have contributed to this deterioration in Castro's influence and stability. He is firmly convinced that Castro will fall at some future, not too distant, date, and that such actions as the CIA are conducting, as well as those of exiles, are contributing to unrest and unsettlement.
• 5. Mr. FitzGerald, in commenting upon criteria as to when the military support should be provided, offered the following. The greatest danger from his point of view is that the mother ships may be captured rather than be sunk. This will result in the capture of crewmen who have too much information and which could result in dangerous publicity for the United States. The location of these raids contributes to the possibility of capture. Hence, only when the raids are conducted in the more vulnerable areas from that point of view, is it likely that the CIA will request military support. He further stated that CIA has no intention of requesting aid for the coming raid.
• 6. General LeMay questioned the danger of capture in view of the capabilities of Cubans and ridiculed the idea that small motor boats should have the capability of such a ship.
• 7. General LeMay and others gave opinions concerning such technicalities as the capability of radar both on land and in the air, capability of ship radar of the U.S. and Cuba, the speed of the mother ship, which was cited as 10 to 12 knots, and other related items.
• 8. Mr. FitzGerald made much of the Cuban volatile nature. He cited that many Cubans are now walking with their heads up and alert because of the realization that there are possibilities of raids and other outside supports, such as the light aircraft raids. He voiced the opinion that Castro would probably take desperate measures as his situation further deteriorates and would turn to creating revolutions in Latin America. He stated that even though his operations may be considered only minor, he thought they were doing about as much as could be done under the present policies. One of his problems was that he felt there was only a total of 50 logical targets and if he conducted as many as 10 raids a month, he would be unable to sustain the build-up of Cuban hopes. He further stated that there were times when certain types of raids were more favorable than others; for instance, on sugar centrals.
• 9. In responding to the question concerning the non-attributality of U.S. equipment, he stated that all equipment they use could be bought on the open market in many countries, even though it was of American origin. He stated that intelligence was not as good yet as they would like to have; however, they are having greater success in having agents enter and depart Cuba.
• 10. General Wheeler injected that he sympathizes with such planners as Mr. FitzGerald because he realizes that many good ideas are never accepted by the cautious policy makers. However, Mr. FitzGerald reported that he believes he had a clearer go-ahead on these operations than he has ever had in his past experience.
• 11. Mr. FitzGerald said that over the next two or three months his plans include critical targets of three classes: electrical systems, sugar centrals, and oil. He cited that electrical systems, although a top priority and a key to the economy, were very difficult targets. The sugar centrals were only of a seasonal nature because unless hit at the peak season, they could be repaired without difficulty or loss of time. In regard to oil, the refineries are most important but were also toughest to hit.
• 12. In response to a comment by General Shoup regarding the sabotage of mines Mr. FitzGerald said there had been a recent case of internal sabotage in a mine. He then explained how the success of his operations can only be measured when internal sabotage is increased. In response to a question, he admitted that there was not any coordination as yet with the internal sabotage program.
• 13. He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However, he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the military personnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least ten high-level military personnel who are talking with CIA but as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence has not yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot to kill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach.
• 14. General LeMay then questioned the advisability of utilizing a communication technique to install a radio capability which would permit break-in on Castro broadcasts. He stated that an Air Force officer named McElroy was available to talk to Mr. FitzGerald on the matter, and Mr. FitzGerald accepted this offer.
• 15. The conference closed with General LeMay directing that Mr. FitzGerald's planners meet with General Krulak's people and work out the details as to how the military can assist in supporting these operations. After Mr. FitzGerald departed, General LeMay gave added directions to Colonel Higgins to initiate necessary steps for planning.
• 16. After the JCS meeting Admiral Riley called Colonel Higgins into his office and read a letter from Mr. McGeorge Bundy which discussed secrecy measures necessary related to Cuba CIA operations. Admiral Riley directed Colonel Higgins to have the nature of this letter put out through SACSA control to SACSA contact points to insure an adequate system for secrecy within the military services. Admiral Riley stated he was returning the letter to Mr. Gilpatric as he did not want written communication by SACSA, but to put this out orally. This was transmitted to Colonel Wyman who will take the action to prepare an appropriate memorandum for the record to be filed with General Ingelido in accordance with further direction by Admiral Riley.
• 17. General Wheeler, Chief of Staff of the Army, called and questioned us concerning SACSA's access for the knowledge of such operations as mentioned in the McGeorge Bundy letter. I advised him that our Pendulum system was in being but that I would look into it in greater detail to determine that it met the letter as well as the spirit of the memorandum. I stated I believed this was so but had not had reason to do it until this date and therefore did not give him a positive answer at that time.
WALTER M. HIGGINS, JR.
• Colonel, USA
Posted by Bill Kelly at 10:20 AM
1 comments:
Tim Fleming said...
Fascinating stuff, but you left out one other diabolical connection--Walter Dornberger, head of Hitler's V-2 rocket program at Peenemunde during WWII. He escaped to America through the auspices of Dulles' Operation Paperclip, and, lo and behold, got a job with Bell Helicopter, working for Micahel Paine. It is widely suspected that the call to Dallas Police fingering Oswald, just 15 minutes after the gunfire died down at Dealey Plaza's Valkyrie, came from someone at Bell Helicopter.
Tim Fleming
author "Murder of an American Nazi"
eloquentbooks.com
leftlooking.blogspot.com
November 28, 2008 2:42 PM
JCS Memo FitzGerald Briefing 25 Sept. 1963
JCS Memo for the Record, Walter Higgins, Brifing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on CIA Cuban Operations and Planning, JFK Collection, JCS Papers,J-3,#29,
202-10001-10028NARA.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=5
This memo is important in regards to the assassination of President Kennedy for a number of reasons. For starters, it gives us the office responsible for coordinating the covert anti-Cuban maritime operations - the Office of the Special Assistant for Counterinsurgency and Special Activities (SACASP), and its director Gen. Krulak.
In addition, this memo shows that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - Gen. Taylor, was preoccupied with Vietnam and not even at this important meeting on Cuban operations, and that in his place, Air Force General Curts LeMay assumed the chair.
In this role, it is quite apparent that Gen. LeMay also played a significant role in the military's assistance to the CIA and the anti-Castro Cuban maritime operations, even more so than the Army and Navy.
In reading the entire series of documents, which aren't in tight chronological order, but should be read in sequence in order to get the full jist of the issues, it seems that LeMay and the Air Force balked at any support to the CIA maritime operations, other than training and basic support, and then offered to run them entirely under the control of the JCS. When it was explained to LeMay that the JCS form strategy and assist in shaping policy, and that operational matters are handled by others - in this case Task Force Alpha, LeMay seems to go along with them.
The biggest threat, according to FitzGerald, is the possiblity of the Cubans capturing a mother ship, like the Rex, and interrogating the crew and confescating the senstive electronic equimpment and any possible records that might be aboard. It would be another Pueblo incident.
LeMay doesn't seem to understand the capabilities of small motorboats, and dismisses the possiblity of them becoming a threat, which shows you how he would fail to recognize the threat of such boats in the pirate waters off Africa today.
LeMay does put a lot of credence in the radio programs and operations, and suggests that a project Air Force officer McElroy is working on might be worthwhile. (See McElroy bio).
Besides mentioning that they were studying the Hitler assassination plot to use against Castro, FitzGerald also mentions that the number and types of targets are limited, and even if they attack two to four a month, within a few months they will have exausted such targets, but only refer to oil, electricty, sugar and military targets, with no real mention of Cuban leaders.
General Krulak is to be given responsiblity for ensuring that the military supplies the CIA with all it needs in regards to support for the Cuban maritime raiders.
Then after the meeting, Adml. Riley reads a letter from Bundy/Gilpatrick that is to be returned to Gilpatrick, that apparently concerns security of Cuban operations, and Higgins, the author of the memo, says that he will check Pendulum, which is "in being," to see if it is adaquate.
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR
COUNTERINSURGENCY AND SPECIAL ACTIVITY (SACASP)
25 September 1963
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
Subject: Briefing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on
CIA Cuban Operations and Planning
1. At the JCS meeting at 1400 on 25 September, Mr. Desmond FitzGerald briefed the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
2. Except for General Taylor and Admiral McDonald, the Joint Chiefs were present, as were the Directors and Secretariat. Colonel Higgins from SACSA was the only other officer in attendance.
3. General LeMay opened the meeting by referring to papers recently discussed by the Joint Chiefs on policy and actions concerning military support of the CIA for operations against Cuba. General LeMay expressed the JCS position as had been reflected in the memoranda to Mr. Vance which in effect is that the Joint Chiefs do not believe that the operations to date are of a size and importance enough to justify the use of military support for protection.
4. Mr. FitzGerald then discussed his personal feelings as to changed conditions in Cuba. Essentially, he believes that Castro's hold in Cuba has been seriously weakened since last July. He believes that the minor raids conducted by the CIA have contributed to this deterioration in Castro's influence and stability. He is firmly convinced that Castro will fall at some future, not too distant, date, and that such actions as the CIA are conducting, as well as those of exiles, are contributing to unrest and unsettlement.
5. Mr. FitzGerald, in commenting upon criteria as to when the military support should be provided, offered the following. The greatest danger from his point of view is that the mother ships may be captured rather than be sunk. This will result in the capture of crewmen who have too much information and which could result in dangerous publicity for the United States. The location of these raids contributes to the possibility of capture. Hence, only when the raids are conducted in the more vulnerable areas from that point of view, is it likely that the CIA will request military support. He further stated that CIA has no intention of requesting aid for the coming raid.
6. General LeMay questioned the danger of capture in view of the capabilities of Cubans and ridiculed the idea that small motor boats should have the capability of such a ship.
7. General LeMay and others gave opinions concerning such technicalities as the capability of radar both on land and in the air, capability of ship radar of the U.S. and Cuba, the speed of the mother ship, which was cited as 10 to 12 knots, and other related items.
8. Mr. FitzGerald made much of the Cuban volatile nature. He cited that many Cubans are now walking with their heads up and alert because of the realization that there are possibilities of raids and other outside supports, such as the light aircraft raids. He voiced the opinion that Castro would probably take desperate measures as his situation further deteriorates and would turn to creating revolutions in Latin America. He stated that even though his operations may be considered only minor, he thought they were doing about as much as could be done under the present policies. One of his problems was that he felt there was only a total of 50 logical targets and if he conducted as many as 10 raids a month, he would be unable to sustain the build-up of Cuban hopes. He further stated that there were times when certain types of raids were more favorable than others; for instance, on sugar centrals.
9. In responding to the question concerning the non-attributality of U.S. equipment, he stated that all equipment they use could be bought on the open market in many countries, even though it was of American origin. He stated that intelligence was not as good yet as they would like to have; however, they are having greater success in having agents enter and depart Cuba.
10. General Wheeler injected that he sympathizes with such planners as Mr. FitzGerald because he realizes that many good ideas are never accepted by the cautious policy makers. However, Mr. FitzGerald reported that he believes he had a clearer go-ahead on these operations than he has ever had in his past experience.
11. Mr. FitzGerald said that over the next two or three months his plans include critical targets of three classes: electrical systems, sugar centrals, and oil. He cited that electrical systems, although a top priority and a key to the economy, were very difficult targets. The sugar centrals were only of a seasonal nature because unless hit at the peak season, they could be repaired without difficulty or loss of time. In regard to oil, the refineries are most important but were also toughest to hit.
12. In response to a comment by General Shoup regarding the sabotage of mines Mr. FitzGerald said there had been a recent case of internal sabotage in a mine. He then explained how the success of his operations can only be measured when internal sabotage is increased. In response to a question, he admitted that there was not any coordination as yet with the internal sabotage program.
13. He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However, he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the military personnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least ten high-level military personnel who are talking with CIA but as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence has not yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot to kill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach.
14. General LeMay then questioned the advisability of utilizing a communication technique to install a radio capability which would permit break-in on Castro broadcasts. He stated that an Air Force officer named McElroy was available to talk to Mr. FitzGerald on the matter, and Mr. FitzGerald accepted this offer.
15. The conference closed with General LeMay directing that Mr. FitzGerald's planners meet with General Krulak's people and work out the details as to how the military can assist in supporting these operations. After Mr. FitzGerald departed, General LeMay gave added directions to Colonel Higgins to initiate necessary steps for planning.
16. After the JCS meeting Admiral Riley called Colonel Higgins into his office and read a letter from Mr. McGeorge Bundy which discussed secrecy measures necessary related to Cuba CIA operations. Admiral Riley directed Colonel Higgins to have the nature of this letter put out through SACSA control to SACSA contact points to insure an adequate system for secrecy within the military services. Admiral Riley stated he was returning the letter to Mr. Gilpatric as he did not want written communication by SACSA, but to put this out orally. This was transmitted to Colonel Wyman who will take the action to prepare an appropriate memorandum for the record to be filed with General Ingelido in accordance with further direction by Admiral Riley.
17. General Wheeler, Chief of Staff of the Army, called and questioned us concerning SACSA's access for the knowledge of such operations as mentioned in the McGeorge Bundy letter. I advised him that our Pendulum system was in being but that I would look into it in greater detail to determine that it met the letter as well as the spirit of the memorandum. I stated I believed this was so but had not had reason to do it until this date and therefore did not give him a positive answer at that time.
WALTER M. HIGGINS, JR.
Colonel, USA
202-10001-10028NARA.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=5
This memo is important in regards to the assassination of President Kennedy for a number of reasons. For starters, it gives us the office responsible for coordinating the covert anti-Cuban maritime operations - the Office of the Special Assistant for Counterinsurgency and Special Activities (SACASP), and its director Gen. Krulak.
In addition, this memo shows that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - Gen. Taylor, was preoccupied with Vietnam and not even at this important meeting on Cuban operations, and that in his place, Air Force General Curts LeMay assumed the chair.
In this role, it is quite apparent that Gen. LeMay also played a significant role in the military's assistance to the CIA and the anti-Castro Cuban maritime operations, even more so than the Army and Navy.
In reading the entire series of documents, which aren't in tight chronological order, but should be read in sequence in order to get the full jist of the issues, it seems that LeMay and the Air Force balked at any support to the CIA maritime operations, other than training and basic support, and then offered to run them entirely under the control of the JCS. When it was explained to LeMay that the JCS form strategy and assist in shaping policy, and that operational matters are handled by others - in this case Task Force Alpha, LeMay seems to go along with them.
The biggest threat, according to FitzGerald, is the possiblity of the Cubans capturing a mother ship, like the Rex, and interrogating the crew and confescating the senstive electronic equimpment and any possible records that might be aboard. It would be another Pueblo incident.
LeMay doesn't seem to understand the capabilities of small motorboats, and dismisses the possiblity of them becoming a threat, which shows you how he would fail to recognize the threat of such boats in the pirate waters off Africa today.
LeMay does put a lot of credence in the radio programs and operations, and suggests that a project Air Force officer McElroy is working on might be worthwhile. (See McElroy bio).
Besides mentioning that they were studying the Hitler assassination plot to use against Castro, FitzGerald also mentions that the number and types of targets are limited, and even if they attack two to four a month, within a few months they will have exausted such targets, but only refer to oil, electricty, sugar and military targets, with no real mention of Cuban leaders.
General Krulak is to be given responsiblity for ensuring that the military supplies the CIA with all it needs in regards to support for the Cuban maritime raiders.
Then after the meeting, Adml. Riley reads a letter from Bundy/Gilpatrick that is to be returned to Gilpatrick, that apparently concerns security of Cuban operations, and Higgins, the author of the memo, says that he will check Pendulum, which is "in being," to see if it is adaquate.
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR
COUNTERINSURGENCY AND SPECIAL ACTIVITY (SACASP)
25 September 1963
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
Subject: Briefing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on
CIA Cuban Operations and Planning
1. At the JCS meeting at 1400 on 25 September, Mr. Desmond FitzGerald briefed the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
2. Except for General Taylor and Admiral McDonald, the Joint Chiefs were present, as were the Directors and Secretariat. Colonel Higgins from SACSA was the only other officer in attendance.
3. General LeMay opened the meeting by referring to papers recently discussed by the Joint Chiefs on policy and actions concerning military support of the CIA for operations against Cuba. General LeMay expressed the JCS position as had been reflected in the memoranda to Mr. Vance which in effect is that the Joint Chiefs do not believe that the operations to date are of a size and importance enough to justify the use of military support for protection.
4. Mr. FitzGerald then discussed his personal feelings as to changed conditions in Cuba. Essentially, he believes that Castro's hold in Cuba has been seriously weakened since last July. He believes that the minor raids conducted by the CIA have contributed to this deterioration in Castro's influence and stability. He is firmly convinced that Castro will fall at some future, not too distant, date, and that such actions as the CIA are conducting, as well as those of exiles, are contributing to unrest and unsettlement.
5. Mr. FitzGerald, in commenting upon criteria as to when the military support should be provided, offered the following. The greatest danger from his point of view is that the mother ships may be captured rather than be sunk. This will result in the capture of crewmen who have too much information and which could result in dangerous publicity for the United States. The location of these raids contributes to the possibility of capture. Hence, only when the raids are conducted in the more vulnerable areas from that point of view, is it likely that the CIA will request military support. He further stated that CIA has no intention of requesting aid for the coming raid.
6. General LeMay questioned the danger of capture in view of the capabilities of Cubans and ridiculed the idea that small motor boats should have the capability of such a ship.
7. General LeMay and others gave opinions concerning such technicalities as the capability of radar both on land and in the air, capability of ship radar of the U.S. and Cuba, the speed of the mother ship, which was cited as 10 to 12 knots, and other related items.
8. Mr. FitzGerald made much of the Cuban volatile nature. He cited that many Cubans are now walking with their heads up and alert because of the realization that there are possibilities of raids and other outside supports, such as the light aircraft raids. He voiced the opinion that Castro would probably take desperate measures as his situation further deteriorates and would turn to creating revolutions in Latin America. He stated that even though his operations may be considered only minor, he thought they were doing about as much as could be done under the present policies. One of his problems was that he felt there was only a total of 50 logical targets and if he conducted as many as 10 raids a month, he would be unable to sustain the build-up of Cuban hopes. He further stated that there were times when certain types of raids were more favorable than others; for instance, on sugar centrals.
9. In responding to the question concerning the non-attributality of U.S. equipment, he stated that all equipment they use could be bought on the open market in many countries, even though it was of American origin. He stated that intelligence was not as good yet as they would like to have; however, they are having greater success in having agents enter and depart Cuba.
10. General Wheeler injected that he sympathizes with such planners as Mr. FitzGerald because he realizes that many good ideas are never accepted by the cautious policy makers. However, Mr. FitzGerald reported that he believes he had a clearer go-ahead on these operations than he has ever had in his past experience.
11. Mr. FitzGerald said that over the next two or three months his plans include critical targets of three classes: electrical systems, sugar centrals, and oil. He cited that electrical systems, although a top priority and a key to the economy, were very difficult targets. The sugar centrals were only of a seasonal nature because unless hit at the peak season, they could be repaired without difficulty or loss of time. In regard to oil, the refineries are most important but were also toughest to hit.
12. In response to a comment by General Shoup regarding the sabotage of mines Mr. FitzGerald said there had been a recent case of internal sabotage in a mine. He then explained how the success of his operations can only be measured when internal sabotage is increased. In response to a question, he admitted that there was not any coordination as yet with the internal sabotage program.
13. He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However, he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the military personnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least ten high-level military personnel who are talking with CIA but as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence has not yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot to kill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach.
14. General LeMay then questioned the advisability of utilizing a communication technique to install a radio capability which would permit break-in on Castro broadcasts. He stated that an Air Force officer named McElroy was available to talk to Mr. FitzGerald on the matter, and Mr. FitzGerald accepted this offer.
15. The conference closed with General LeMay directing that Mr. FitzGerald's planners meet with General Krulak's people and work out the details as to how the military can assist in supporting these operations. After Mr. FitzGerald departed, General LeMay gave added directions to Colonel Higgins to initiate necessary steps for planning.
16. After the JCS meeting Admiral Riley called Colonel Higgins into his office and read a letter from Mr. McGeorge Bundy which discussed secrecy measures necessary related to Cuba CIA operations. Admiral Riley directed Colonel Higgins to have the nature of this letter put out through SACSA control to SACSA contact points to insure an adequate system for secrecy within the military services. Admiral Riley stated he was returning the letter to Mr. Gilpatric as he did not want written communication by SACSA, but to put this out orally. This was transmitted to Colonel Wyman who will take the action to prepare an appropriate memorandum for the record to be filed with General Ingelido in accordance with further direction by Admiral Riley.
17. General Wheeler, Chief of Staff of the Army, called and questioned us concerning SACSA's access for the knowledge of such operations as mentioned in the McGeorge Bundy letter. I advised him that our Pendulum system was in being but that I would look into it in greater detail to determine that it met the letter as well as the spirit of the memorandum. I stated I believed this was so but had not had reason to do it until this date and therefore did not give him a positive answer at that time.
WALTER M. HIGGINS, JR.
Colonel, USA
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Project FOUR LEAVES & the DPA
After reading the September 25 Higgins memo re: FitzGerald briefing of JCS, which mentioned a secret memo from Bundy orally read to the JSC, I looked to the JFK Library at Bundy's papers and JFK's Diary to see if anything relevant is published there.
SUBJECT: Assignment of Highest National Security Priority to Project FOUR LEAVES
In response to a recommendation by the Secretary of Defense, the president, under the authority granted by the Defense Production Act of 1950, today established the program listed below as being in the highest national security priority category for development and production.
FOUR LEAVES
McGeorge Bundy
THE WHITE HOUSE DIARY
SEPTEMBER 23 1963
http://www.jfklibrary.org/White%2BHouse%2B...eptember/23.htm
“President Kennedy assigns the highest national priority to Project FOUR LEAVES to develop and produce a military communications system.
A tip of the hat to Robert Howard for the White House diary reference. I also came across the fact that Gen. Taylor wasn't at the JCS briefing because he was on his way to Vietnam with McNamara.
I considered that Four Leaves may have to do with that trip when I read: There is the note that on September 25, 1963 "Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara and Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrived in Saigon to investigate what effect the political problems in South Vietnam have had on the military situation. They are expected to visit the-country's four military regions. (3:1)"
Four Leaves, four military regions?
Mark Knight thought not, calling attention to the fact that the Defense Production Act doesn't just pertain to Vietnam, and that the reference to the DPA may be a key.
Then I came across this Yahoo! Group called coldwarrcomms@yahoogroups.com, who shoot the bull about cold war military communications.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coldwarcomms/message/7124NSAM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coldwarcomms/message/7124
In the only open source reference to Project Four Leaves I can find, a guy named Sam asks, "Does anyone know what the DoD's Project FOUR LEAVES was? NSAM 261 from
9/23/1963 assigns it to the "highest national priority category for
development and production" in response to a recommendation from the
Secretary of Defense. I can't find any reference to the project other than the NSAM. Figured someone on this list may have heard of it."
In response, Albert writes, "I'd heard that name a few years ago, and looked into it a little. I nevercould find anything about FOUR LEAVES, but I came to the conclusion that the NSAM was actually referring to FALLING LEAVES. FALLING LEAVES was the Cuban Missile Early Warning System. It consisted of radar stations at Moorestown, NJ, Laredo, TX, and Thomasville, AL, with hotline links to the Pentagon, NORAD, and SAC. I learned of FALLING LEAVES purely by luck while reading a book titled "The
Limits of Safety: Organizations, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons" by Scott D.
Sagan (1993), which devotes more than a dozen pages to the topic. BTW, I
would highly recommend that book to anyone interested in nuclear C3I issues.
I disagree with this assessment, that Project Four Leaves is actually Project Falling Leaves, for a number of reasons. For one, I don't think Mrs. Lincoln, who typed up the memo, would make such a mistake, or Bundy would not catch it as it is such an important document - a National Security Action Memorandum.
So it's not a mistake, a typo or Mrs. Lincoln mishearing Bundy or the President.
In addition, Falling Leaves was an October, 1962 circa project, a year earlier, and concerned miliary communications and nuclear mishaps, not the establishment of a military communications system.
The standard history of military communicaitons also fail to mention Project Four Leaves, though it does account for the development of satelite communcaitons around the same time period.
Blitz wrote, "That is interesting, because I dont find much on it either. Prob still
clasified. One can put a bit of light on it, as its immediately prior to
VietNam...when they were still fumbling for reasons to be there...also it
was just prior to the Kennedy assassination. Interestingly,
shortly prior to it, in NSAM 252, the establishing of a National
Communications system."
http://www.aero.org/publications/crosslink/winter2002/01.html
So I went back to the Defense Production Act of 1950 to see more of what that was all about.
As Mark suggested, the DPA is a key.
John Dolva started a thread on the subject at the Education Forum:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13902
Wikipedia: Defense Production Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act
The Defense Production Act (Pub.L. 81-774) is a United States law enacted on September 8, 1950, in response to the start of the Korean War. It was part of a broad civil defense and war mobilization effort in the context of the Cold War. Its implementing regulations, the Defense Priorities and Allocation System (DPAS), are located at 15 CFR §§700 to 700.93. The Act has been periodically reauthorized and amended, and remains in force as of 2007.
The Act contains three major sections. The first authorizes the President to require businesses to sign contracts or fulfill orders deemed necessary for national defense. The second authorizes the President to establish mechanisms (such as regulations, orders or agencies) to allocate materials, services and facilities to promote national defense. The third section authorizes the President to control the civilian economy so that scarce and/or critical materials necessary to the national defense effort are available for defense needs.[1]
The Act also authorizes the President to requisition property, force industry to expand production and the supply of basic resources, impose wage and price controls, settle labor disputes, control consumer and real estate credit, establish contractual priorities, and allocate raw materials to aid the national defense.[1]
The President's authority to place contracts under the DPA is the part of the Act most often used by the Department of Defense (DOD) since the 1970s. Most of the other functions of the Act are administered by the Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security (SIES) in the Bureau of Industry and Security in the Department of Commerce.[2]
Korean War-era usage
The DPA was used during the Korean War to establish a large defense mobilization infrastructure and bureacracy. Under the authority of the Act, President Harry S. Truman established the Office of Defense Mobilization, instituted wage and price controls, strictly regulated production in heavy industries such as steel and mining, and ordered the disperal of wartime manufacturing plans across the nation.[3]
The Act also played a vital role in the establishment of the domestic aluminum and titanium industries in the 1950s. Using the Act, DOD provided capital and interest-free loans, and directed mining and manufacturing resources as well as skilled laborers to these two processing industries.[4]
Use as innovation tool
Beginning in the 1980s, DOD began using the contracting and spending provisions of the DPA to provide seed money to develop new technologies.[5] Using the Act, DOD has helped to develop a number of new technologies and materials, including silicon carbide ceramics, indium phosphide and gallium arsenide semiconductors, microwave power tubes, radiation-hardened microelectronics, superconducting wire, and metal composites.[4]
Defense Production Act of 1950
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Defense_Production_Act_of_1950
The Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-774) was enacted due to "Rising wages and prices during the Korean War [which] caused serious economic difficulties within the United States. In an effort to expand production and insure economic stability, the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-774) authorized Governmental activities in various areas, including requisition of property for national defense, expansion of productive capacity and supply, wage and price stabilization, settlement of labor disputes, control of consumer and real estate credit, and establishment of contract priorities and materials allocation designed to aid the national defense. Under section 712, the Joint Committee on Defense Production was established to serve as a 'watchdog' over Federal agencies administering the various programs authorized by the act. The members of the committee were drawn from the Senate and House Committees on Banking and Currency."[1]
The Defense Production Act Title III Program "authorities were first used extensively during the early 1950s to expedite expansion of industrial capacity for many strategic and critical materials, machine tools, and a number of other critical items needed to satisfy evolving defense requirements. Despite (or, perhaps, partially because of) enormous successes in expanding needed domestic production capabilities, use of Title III declined markedly during the late 1950s and early 1960s and eventually ended altogether by the end of the 1960s. Congress revived and modernized the Title III authorities in the mid 1980s, and these authorities have been used since that time to promote improvement and expansion of industrial capabilities needed for national defense purposes."[2]
"Today's Title III Program differs in fundamental ways from the original program established in 1950. First, the original program was created in response to the national emergency resulting from the Korean conflict and Cold War tensions. Today's program focuses primarily on promoting the transition of new technologies from research and development to efficient and affordable production and the rapid insertion of these new technologies in defense systems."[3]
"Second, the original program was based on virtually unlimited authorities to encourage private investment in materials production and supply. Today's program is subject to a number of restrictions to ensure that Government action is needed and that Title III authorities are the best means to meet the national defense need. Moreover, proposed Title III actions are subject to prior review by Congress and are funded with moneys appropriated for Title III purposes."[4]
"Third, the original program was supported by a funding ceiling of $2.1 billion (in 1950s dollars) and was permitted to obligate these funds based on probable ultimate net cost to the Government rather than total contract liability. Today's program has been funded at an average annual rate of $20-$25 million and has been required to obligate funds at 100 percent of contract liability."[5]
"Despite the significant differences between the original program and today's, the basic purpose of the Title III authorities has not changed - to expand domestic production capabilities to meet defense needs."[6] And, some would argue, to specialize these domestic production capabilities only towards defense needs, assuming that control of global finance, trade and port facilities will continue to feed the civilian sector, and that there is no need, e.g. for US self-sufficiency in oil.
And John Dolva also calls attention to the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) of the US DOD, which developed the Internet among other things.
http://www.acq.osd.mil/ott/dpatitle3/executive.htm
http://bulk.resource.org/gao.gov/81-774/00001DD3.pdf
OpenCongress - U.S. Congress - H.R.6894 Defense Production Act ...HR6894 Defense Production Act Extension and Reauthorization of 2008 on ... OpenCongress is a joint project of the Participatory Politics Foundation and the ...
www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h6894/show - 43k - Cached - Similar pages -
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6894:
Most recent GEO Report :
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08854.pdf
NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (64 Stat. 798; 50 U.S.C. App. 2061, et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:
PART I - PURPOSE, POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION
Section 101. Purpose. This order delegates authorities and addresses national defense industrial resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended ("the Act"), except for the amendments to Title III of the Act in the Energy Security Act of 1980 and telecommunication authorities under Executive Order No. 12472.
Sec. 102. Policy. The United States must have an industrial and technology base capable of meeting national defense requirements, and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency. The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness. The authorities provided in the Act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to all threats to the national security of the United States.
Sec. 103. General Functions. Federal departments and agencies responsible for defense acquisition (or for industrial resources needed to support defense acquisition) shall:
(a) Identify requirements for the full spectrum of national security emergencies, including military, industrial, and essential civilian demand;
(b) Assess continually the capability of the domestic industrial and technological base to satisfy requirements in peacetime and times of national emergency, specifically evaluating the availability of adequate industrial resource and production sources, including subcontractors and suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical personnel;
(c) Be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate industrial resources and production capability, including services and critical technology for national defense requirements;
(d) Improve the efficiency and responsiveness, to defense requirements, of the domestic industrial base; and
(e) Foster cooperation between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development and for acquisition of materials, components, and equipment to enhance industrial base efficiency and responsiveness.
Sec. 104. Implementation.
(a) The National Security Council is the principal forum for consideration and resolution of national security resource preparedness policy.
(b) The Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency ("Director, FEMA") shall:
(1) Serve as an advisor to the National Security Council on issues of national security resource preparedness and on the use of the authorities and functions delegated by this order;
(2) Provide for the central coordination of the plans and programs incident to authorities and functions delegated under this order, and provide guidance and procedures approved by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs to the Federal departments and agencies under this order;
(3) Establish procedures, in consultation with Federal departments and agencies assigned functions under this order, to resolve in a timely and effective manner conflicts and issues that may arise in implementing the authorities and functions delegated under this order; and
(4) Report to the President periodically concerning all program activities conducted pursuant to this order.
(c) The head of every Federal department and agency assigned functions under this order shall ensure that the performance of these functions is consistent with National Security Council policy and guidelines.
PART II - PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS
Sec. 201. Delegations of Priorities and Allocations.
(a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:
(1) The Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) The Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) The Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) The Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) The Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) The Secretary of Commerce for all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
(b) The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the heads of those departments and agencies specified in subsection 201(a) of this order, shall administer the Defense Priorities and Allocations System ("DPA") regulations that will be used to implement the authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act as delegated to the Secretary of Commerce in subsection 201(a)(6) of this order. The Secretary of Commerce will re-delegate to the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of other departments and agencies as appropriate, authority for the priority rating of contracts and orders for all materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order. The Secretary of Commerce shall act as appropriate upon Special Priorities Assistance requests in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the need at hand.
(c) The Director, FEMA, shall attempt to resolve issues or disagreements on priorities or allocations between Federal departments or agencies in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the issue at hand and, if not resolved, such issues will be referred to the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs for final determination.
(d) The head of each Federal department or agency assigned functions under subsection 201(a) of this order, when necessary, shall make the finding required under subsection 101(b) of the Act. This finding shall be submitted for the President's approval through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. Upon such approval the head of the Federal department or agency that made the finding may use the authority of subsection 101(a) of the Act to control the general distribution of any material (including applicable services) in the civilian market.
(e) The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs is hereby delegated the authority under subsection 101(c)(3) of the Act, and will be assisted by the Director, FEMA, in ensuring the coordinated administration of the Act.
Sec. 202. Determinations. The authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense:
(a) By the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, stockpiling, outer space, and directly related activities;
(b) By the Secretary of Energy with respect to energy production and construction, distribution and use, and directly related activities; and
(c) By the Director, FEMA, with respect to essential civilian needs supporting national defense, including civil defense and continuity of government and directly related activities.
Sec. 203. Maximizing Domestic Energy Supplies. The authority of the President to perform the functions provided by subsection 101(c) of the Act is delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, who shall redelegate to the Secretary of Energy the authority to make the findings described in subsection 101(c)(2)(A) that the materials (including equipment), services, and facilities are critical and essential. The Secretary of Commerce shall make the finding described in subsection 101(c)(2)(A) of the Act that the materials (including equipment), services, or facilities are scarce, and the finding described in subsection 101(c)(2)(B) that it is necessary to use the authority provided by subsection 101(c)(1).
Sec. 204. Chemical and Biological Warfare. The authority of the President conferred by subsection 104(b) of the Act is delegated to the Secretary of Defense. This authority may not be further delegated by the Secretary.
PART III - EXPANSION OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY AND SUPPLY
Sec. 301.
(a) Financing Institution Guarantees. To expedite or expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items essential to the national defense, the head of each Federal department or agency engaged in procurement for the national defense (referred to as "agency head" in this part) and the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or production in foreign countries) are authorized to guarantee in whole or in part any public or private financing institution, subject to provisions of section 301 of the Act. Guarantees shall be made in consultation with the Department of the Treasury as to the terms and conditions thereof. The Director of the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") shall be informed when such guarantees are to be made.
(b) Direct Loan Guarantees. To expedite or expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items essential to the national defense, each agency head is authorized to make direct loan guarantees from funds appropriated to their agency for Title III.
(c) Fiscal Agent. Each Federal Reserve Bank is designated and authorized to act, on behalf of any guaranteeing agency, as fiscal agent in the making of guarantee contracts and in otherwise carrying out the purposes of section 301 of the Act.
(d) Regulations. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is authorized, after consultation with heads of guaranteeing departments and agencies, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Director, OMB, to prescribe regulations governing procedures, forms, rates of interest, and fees for such guarantee contracts.
Sec. 302. Loans.
(a) To expedite production and deliveries or services to aid in carrying out government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or a critical technology item for the national defense, an agency head is authorized, subject to the provisions of section 302 of the Act, to submit to the Secretary of the Treasury or the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or production in foreign countries) applications for loans.
(b) To expedite or expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items essential to the national defense, each agency head may make direct loans from funds appropriated to their agency for Title III.
(c) After receiving a loan application and determining that financial assistance is not otherwise available on reasonable terms, the Secretary of the Treasury or the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or production in foreign countries) may make loans, subject to provisions of section 302 of the Act.
Sec. 303. Purchase Commitments.
(a) In order to carry out the objectives of the Act, and subject to the provisions of section 303 thereof, an agency head is authorized to make provision for purchases of, or commitments to purchase, an industrial resource or a critical technology item for government use or resale.
(b) Materials acquired under section 303 of the Act that exceed the needs of the programs under the Act may be transferred to the National Defense Stockpile, if such transfer is determined by the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager to be in the public interest.
Sec. 304. Subsidy Payments. In order to ensure the supply of raw or non-processed materials from high-cost sources, an agency head is authorized to make subsidy payments, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director, OMB, and subject to the provisions of section 303(c) of the Act.
Sec. 305. Determinations and Findings. When carrying out the authorities in sections 301 through 303 of this order, an agency head is authorized to make the required determinations, judgments, statements, certifications, and findings, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Energy or Director, FEMA, as appropriate. The agency head shall provide a copy of the determination, judgment, statement, certification, or finding to the Director, OMB, to the Director, FEMA, and, when appropriate, to the Secretary of the Treasury.
Sec. 306. Strategic and Critical Materials.
(a) The Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager and subject to the provisions of section 303 of the Act, is authorized to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of critical and strategic materials and other materials.
(b) An agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(g) of the Act, to make provision for the development of substitutes for strategic and critical materials, critical components, critical technology items, and other industrial resources to aid the national defense.
(c) An agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to make provisions to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of critical and strategic materials and other materials.
Sec. 307. Government-owned Equipment. An agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(e) of the Act, to install additional equipment, facilities, processes, or improvements to facilities owned by the government and to install government-owned equipment in industrial facilities owned by private persons.
Sec. 308. Identification of Shortfalls. Except during periods of national emergency or after a Presidential determination in accordance with sections 301(e)(1)(D)(ii), 302(c)(4)(B), or 303(a)(7)(B) of the Act, no guarantee, loan or other action pursuant to sections 301, 302, and 303 of the Act to correct an industrial shortfall shall be taken unless the shortfall has been identified in the Budget of the United States or amendments thereto.
Sec. 309. Defense Production Act Fund Manager. The Secretary of Defense is designated the Defense Production Act Fund Manager, in accordance with section 304(f) of the Act, and shall carry out the duties specified in that section, in consultation with the agency heads having approved Title III projects and appropriated Title III funds.
Sec. 310. Critical Items List.
(a) Pursuant to section 107(b)(1)(A) of the Act, the Secretary of Defense shall identify critical components and critical technology items for each item on the Critical Items List of the Commanders-in-Chief of the Unified and Specified Commands and other items within the inventory of weapon systems and defense equipment.
(b) Each agency head shall take appropriate action to ensure that critical components or critical technology items are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency. "Appropriate action" may include restricting contract solicitations to reliable sources, restricting contract solicitations to domestic sources (pursuant to statutory authority), stockpiling critical components, and developing substitutes for critical components or critical technology items.
Sec. 311. Strengthening Domestic Capability. An agency head, in accordance with section 107(a) of the Act, may utilize the authority of Title III of the Act or any other provision of law, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, to provide appropriate incentives to develop, maintain, modernize, and expand the productive capacities of domestic sources for critical components, critical technology items, and industrial resources essential for the execution of the national security strategy of the United States.
Sec. 312. Modernization of Equipment. An agency head, in accordance with section 108(b) of the Act, may utilize the authority of Title III of the Act to guarantee the purchase or lease of advance manufacturing equipment and any related services with respect to any such equipment for purposes of the Act.
PART IV - IMPACT OF OFFSETS
Sec. 401. Offsets.
(a) The responsibilities and authority conferred upon the President by section 309 of the Act with respect to offsets are delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, who shall function as the President's Executive Agent for carrying out this authority.
(b) The Secretary of Commerce shall prepare the annual report required by section 309(a) of the Act in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense, Treasury, Labor, State, the United States Trade Representative, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the Director of Central Intelligence, and the heads of other departments and agencies as required. The heads of Federal departments and agencies shall provide the Secretary of Commerce with such information as may be necessary for the effective performance of this function.
(c) The offset report shall be subject to the normal interagency clearance process conducted by the Director, OMB, prior to the report's submission by the President to Congress.
PART V - VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Sec. 501. Appointments. The authority of the President under sections 708(c) and (d) of the Act is delegated to the heads of each Federal department or agency, except that, insofar as that authority relates to section 101 of the Act, it is delegated only to the heads of each Federal department or agency assigned functions under section 201(a) of this order. The authority delegated under this section shall be exercised pursuant to the provisions of section 708 of the Act, and copies and the status of the use of such delegations shall be furnished to the Director, FEMA.
Sec. 502. Advisory Committees. The authority of the President under section 708(d) of the Act and delegated in section 501 of this order (relating to establishment of advisory committees) shall be exercised only after consultation with, and in accordance with, guidelines and procedures established by the Administrator of General Services.
PART VI - EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL
Sec. 601. National Defense Executive Reserve.
(a) In accordance with section 710(e) of the Act, there is established in the Executive Branch a National Defense Executive Reserve ("NDER") composed of persons of recognized expertise from various segments of the private sector and from government (except full-time federal employees) for training for employment in executive positions in the Federal Government in the event of an emergency that requires such employment.
(b) The head of any department or agency may establish a unit of the NDER in the department or agency and train members of that unit.
(c) The head of each department or agency with an NDER unit is authorized to exercise the President's authority to employ civilian personnel in accordance with section 703(a) of the Act when activating all or a part of its NDER unit. The exercise of this authority shall be subject to the provisions of subsections 601(d) and (e) of this order and shall not be re-delegated.
(d) The head of a department or agency may activate an NDER unit, in whole or in part, upon the written determination that an emergency affecting the national security or defense preparedness of the United States exists and that the activation of the unit is necessary to carry out the emergency program functions of the department or agency.
(e) At least 72 hours prior to activating the NDER unit, the head of the department or agency shall notify, in writing, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs of the impending activation and provide a copy of the determination required under subsection 601(d) of this order.
(f) The Director, FEMA, shall coordinate the NDER program activities of departments and agencies in establishing units of the Reserve; provide for appropriate guidance for recruitment, training, and activation; and issue necessary rules and guidance in connection with the program.
(g) This order suspends any delegated authority, regulation, or other requirement or condition with respect to the activation of any NDER unit, in whole or in part, or appointment of any NDER member that is inconsistent with the authorities delegated herein, provided that the aforesaid suspension applies only as long as sections 703(a) and 710(e) of the Act are in effect.
Sec. 602. Consultants. The head of each department or agency assigned functions under this order is delegated authority under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The authority delegated by this section shall not be re-delegated.
PART VII - LABOR SUPPLY
Sec. 701. Secretary of Labor. The Secretary of Labor, identified in this section as the Secretary, shall:
(a) Collect, analyze, and maintain data needed to make a continuing appraisal of the nation's labor requirements and the supply of workers for purposes of national defense. All agencies of the government shall cooperate with the Secretary in furnishing information necessary for this purpose, to the extent permitted by law;
(b) In response to requests from the head of a Federal department or agency engaged in the procurement for national defense, consult with and advise that department or agency with respect to (1) the effect of contemplated actions on labor supply and utilization, (2) the relation of labor supply to materials and facilities requirements, and (3) such other matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;
(c) Formulate plans, programs, and policies for meeting defense and essential civilian labor requirements;
(d) Project skill shortages to facilitate meeting defense and essential civilian needs and establish training programs;
(e) Determine the occupations and skills critical to meeting the labor requirements of defense and essential civilian activities and, with the assistance of the Secretary of Defense, the Director of Selective Service, and such other persons as the Director, FEMA, may designate, develop policies regulating the induction and deferment of personnel for the armed services, except for civilian personnel in the reserves; and
(f) Administer an effective labor-management relations policy to support the activities and programs under this order with the cooperation of other Federal agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
PART VIII - DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE INFORMATION AND REPORTS
Sec. 801. Foreign Acquisition of Companies. The Secretary of the Treasury, in cooperation with the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, the Department of Agriculture, the Attorney General, and the Director of Central Intelligence, shall complete and furnish a report to the President and then to Congress in accordance with the requirements of section 721(k) of the Act concerning foreign efforts to acquire United States companies involved in research, development, or production of critical technologies and industrial espionage activities directed by foreign governments against private U.S. companies.
Sec. 802. Defense Industrial Base Information System.
(a) The Secretary of Defense and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, shall establish an information system on the domestic defense industrial base in accordance with the requirements of section 722 of the Act.
(b) In establishing the information system required by subsection (a) of this order, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, shall consult with each other for the purposes of performing the duties listed in section 722(d)(1) of the Act.
(c) The Secretary of Defense shall convene a task force consisting of the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of each military department and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, to carry out the duties under section 722(d)(2) of the Act.
(d) The Secretary of Defense shall report to Congress on a strategic plan for developing a cost-effective, comprehensive information system capable of identifying on a timely, ongoing basis vulnerability in critical components and critical technology items. The plans shall include an assessment of the performance and cost-effectiveness of procedures specified in section 722(b) of the Act.
(e) The Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Bureau of the Census, shall consult with the Secretary of Defense and the Director, FEMA, to improve the usefulness of information derived from the Census of Manufacturers in carrying out section 722 of the Act.
(f) The Secretary of Defense shall perform an analysis of the production base for not more than two major weapons systems of each military department in establishing the information system under section 722 of the Act. Each analysis shall identify the critical components of each system.
(g) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other Federal departments and agencies as appropriate, shall issue a biennial report on critical components and technology in accordance with section 722(e) of the Act.
PART IX - GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 901. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 702 of the Act, the following definitions apply throughout this order:
(a) "Civil transportation" includes movement of persons and property by all modes of transportation in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce within the United States, its territories and possessions, and the District of Columbia, and, without limitation, related public storage and warehousing, ports, services, equipment and facilities, such as transportation carrier shop and repair facilities. However, "civil transportation" shall not include transportation owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, use of petroleum and gas pipelines, and coal slurry pipelines used only to supply energy production facilities directly. As applied herein, "civil transportation" shall include direction, control, and coordination of civil transportation capacity regardless of ownership.
(b) Energy means all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal, coke, coal chemicals, coal liquification, and coal gasification), and atomic energy, and the production, conservation, use, control, and distribution (including pipelines) of all of these forms of energy.
(c) "Farm equipment" means equipment, machinery, and repair parts manufactured for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for market use of food resources.
(d) "Fertilizer" means any product or combination of products that contain one or more of the elements -- nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium -- for use as a plant nutrient.
(e) "Food resources" means all commodities and products, simple, mixed, or compound, or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. "Food resources" also means all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, cotton, tobacco, wool, mohair, hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.
(f) "Food resource facilities" means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on-farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, livestock and poultry feed and seed, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer (excluding transportation thereof).
(g) "Functions" include powers, duties, authority, responsibilities, and discretion.
(h) "Head of each Federal department or agency engaged in procurement for the national defense" means the heads of the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Commerce, as well as those departments and agencies listed in Executive Order No. 10789.
(i) "Heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies" as used in part VIII of this order means the heads of such other Federal agencies and departments that acquire information or need information with respect to making any determination to exercise any authority under the Act.
(j) "Health resources" means materials, facilities, health supplies, and equipment (including pharmaceutical, blood collecting and dispensing supplies, biological, surgical textiles, and emergency surgical instruments and supplies) required to prevent the impairment of, improve, or restore the physical and mental health conditions of the population.
(k) "Metals and minerals" means all raw materials of mineral origin (excluding energy) including their refining, smelting, or processing, but excluding their fabrication.
(l) "Strategic and Critical Materials" means materials (including energy) that (1) would be needed to supply the military, industrial, and essential civilian needs of the United States during a national security emergency, and (2) are not found or produced in the United States in sufficient quantities to meet such need and are vulnerable to the termination or reduction of the availability of the material.
(m) "Water resources" means all usable water, from all sources, within the jurisdiction of the United States, which can be managed, controlled, and allocated to meet emergency requirements.
Sec. 902. General.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 902(c) of this order, the authorities vested in the President by title VII of the Act may be exercised and performed by the head of each department and agency in carrying out the delegated authorities under the Act and this order.
(b) The authorities which may be exercised and performed pursuant to subsection 902(a) of this order shall include (1) the power to redelegate authorities, and to authorize the successive re-delegation of authorities, to departments and agencies, officers, and employees of the government, and (2) the power of subpoena with respect to authorities delegated in parts II, III, and IV of this order, provided that the subpoena power shall be utilized only after the scope and purpose of the investigation, inspection, or inquiry to which the subpoena relates have been defined either by the appropriate officer identified in subsection 902(a) of this order or by such other person or persons as the officer shall designate.
(c) Excluded from the authorities delegated by subsection 902(a) of this order are authorities delegated by parts V, VI, and VIII of this order and the authority with respect to fixing compensation under section 703(a) of the Act.
Sec. 903. Authority. All previously issued orders, regulations, rulings, certificates, directives, and other actions relating to any function affected by this order shall remain in effect except as they are inconsistent with this order or are subsequently amended or revoked under proper authority. Nothing in this order shall affect the validity or force of anything done under previous delegations or other assignment of authority under the Act.
Sec. 904. Effect on other Orders.
(a) The following are superseded or revoked:
(1) Section 3, Executive Order No. 8248 of September 8, 1939, (4 FR 3864).
(2) Executive Order No. 10222 of March 8, 1951 (16 FR 2247).
(3) Executive Order No. 10480 of August 14, 1953 (18 FR 4939).
(4) Executive Order No. 10647 of November 28, 1955 (20 FR 8769).
(5) Executive Order No. 11179 of September 22, 1964 (29 FR 13239).
(6) Executive Order No. 11355 of May 26, 1967 (32 FR 7803).
(7) Sections 7 and 8, Executive Order No. 11912 of April 13, 1976 (41 FR 15825, 15826-27).
(8) Section 3, Executive Order No. 12148 of July 20, 1979 (44 FR 43239, 43241).
(9) Executive Order No. 12521 of June 24, 1985 (50 FR 26335).
(10) Executive Order No. 12649 of August 11, 1988 (53 FR 30639).
(11) Executive Order No. 12773 of September 26, 1991 (56 FR 49387), except that part of the order that amends section 604 of Executive Order 10480.
(b) Executive Order No. 10789 of November 14, 1958, is amended by deleting "and in view of the existing national emergency declared by Proclamation No. 2914 of December 16, 1950,î as it appears in the first sentence.
(c) Executive Order No. 11790, as amended, relating to the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, is amended by deleting "Executive Order No. 10480" where it appears in section 4 and substituting this order's number.
(d) Subject to subsection 904(c) of this order, to the extent that any provision of any prior Executive order is inconsistent with the provisions of this order, this order shall control and such prior provision is amended accordingly.
Sec. 905. Judicial Review. This order is not intended to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United States, its agencies, its officers, or any person.
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 3, 1994
SUBJECT: Assignment of Highest National Security Priority to Project FOUR LEAVES
In response to a recommendation by the Secretary of Defense, the president, under the authority granted by the Defense Production Act of 1950, today established the program listed below as being in the highest national security priority category for development and production.
FOUR LEAVES
McGeorge Bundy
THE WHITE HOUSE DIARY
SEPTEMBER 23 1963
http://www.jfklibrary.org/White%2BHouse%2B...eptember/23.htm
“President Kennedy assigns the highest national priority to Project FOUR LEAVES to develop and produce a military communications system.
A tip of the hat to Robert Howard for the White House diary reference. I also came across the fact that Gen. Taylor wasn't at the JCS briefing because he was on his way to Vietnam with McNamara.
I considered that Four Leaves may have to do with that trip when I read: There is the note that on September 25, 1963 "Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara and Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrived in Saigon to investigate what effect the political problems in South Vietnam have had on the military situation. They are expected to visit the-country's four military regions. (3:1)"
Four Leaves, four military regions?
Mark Knight thought not, calling attention to the fact that the Defense Production Act doesn't just pertain to Vietnam, and that the reference to the DPA may be a key.
Then I came across this Yahoo! Group called coldwarrcomms@yahoogroups.com, who shoot the bull about cold war military communications.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coldwarcomms/message/7124NSAM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coldwarcomms/message/7124
In the only open source reference to Project Four Leaves I can find, a guy named Sam asks, "Does anyone know what the DoD's Project FOUR LEAVES was? NSAM 261 from
9/23/1963 assigns it to the "highest national priority category for
development and production" in response to a recommendation from the
Secretary of Defense. I can't find any reference to the project other than the NSAM. Figured someone on this list may have heard of it."
In response, Albert writes, "I'd heard that name a few years ago, and looked into it a little. I nevercould find anything about FOUR LEAVES, but I came to the conclusion that the NSAM was actually referring to FALLING LEAVES. FALLING LEAVES was the Cuban Missile Early Warning System. It consisted of radar stations at Moorestown, NJ, Laredo, TX, and Thomasville, AL, with hotline links to the Pentagon, NORAD, and SAC. I learned of FALLING LEAVES purely by luck while reading a book titled "The
Limits of Safety: Organizations, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons" by Scott D.
Sagan (1993), which devotes more than a dozen pages to the topic. BTW, I
would highly recommend that book to anyone interested in nuclear C3I issues.
I disagree with this assessment, that Project Four Leaves is actually Project Falling Leaves, for a number of reasons. For one, I don't think Mrs. Lincoln, who typed up the memo, would make such a mistake, or Bundy would not catch it as it is such an important document - a National Security Action Memorandum.
So it's not a mistake, a typo or Mrs. Lincoln mishearing Bundy or the President.
In addition, Falling Leaves was an October, 1962 circa project, a year earlier, and concerned miliary communications and nuclear mishaps, not the establishment of a military communications system.
The standard history of military communicaitons also fail to mention Project Four Leaves, though it does account for the development of satelite communcaitons around the same time period.
Blitz wrote, "That is interesting, because I dont find much on it either. Prob still
clasified. One can put a bit of light on it, as its immediately prior to
VietNam...when they were still fumbling for reasons to be there...also it
was just prior to the Kennedy assassination. Interestingly,
shortly prior to it, in NSAM 252, the establishing of a National
Communications system."
http://www.aero.org/publications/crosslink/winter2002/01.html
So I went back to the Defense Production Act of 1950 to see more of what that was all about.
As Mark suggested, the DPA is a key.
John Dolva started a thread on the subject at the Education Forum:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13902
Wikipedia: Defense Production Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act
The Defense Production Act (Pub.L. 81-774) is a United States law enacted on September 8, 1950, in response to the start of the Korean War. It was part of a broad civil defense and war mobilization effort in the context of the Cold War. Its implementing regulations, the Defense Priorities and Allocation System (DPAS), are located at 15 CFR §§700 to 700.93. The Act has been periodically reauthorized and amended, and remains in force as of 2007.
The Act contains three major sections. The first authorizes the President to require businesses to sign contracts or fulfill orders deemed necessary for national defense. The second authorizes the President to establish mechanisms (such as regulations, orders or agencies) to allocate materials, services and facilities to promote national defense. The third section authorizes the President to control the civilian economy so that scarce and/or critical materials necessary to the national defense effort are available for defense needs.[1]
The Act also authorizes the President to requisition property, force industry to expand production and the supply of basic resources, impose wage and price controls, settle labor disputes, control consumer and real estate credit, establish contractual priorities, and allocate raw materials to aid the national defense.[1]
The President's authority to place contracts under the DPA is the part of the Act most often used by the Department of Defense (DOD) since the 1970s. Most of the other functions of the Act are administered by the Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security (SIES) in the Bureau of Industry and Security in the Department of Commerce.[2]
Korean War-era usage
The DPA was used during the Korean War to establish a large defense mobilization infrastructure and bureacracy. Under the authority of the Act, President Harry S. Truman established the Office of Defense Mobilization, instituted wage and price controls, strictly regulated production in heavy industries such as steel and mining, and ordered the disperal of wartime manufacturing plans across the nation.[3]
The Act also played a vital role in the establishment of the domestic aluminum and titanium industries in the 1950s. Using the Act, DOD provided capital and interest-free loans, and directed mining and manufacturing resources as well as skilled laborers to these two processing industries.[4]
Use as innovation tool
Beginning in the 1980s, DOD began using the contracting and spending provisions of the DPA to provide seed money to develop new technologies.[5] Using the Act, DOD has helped to develop a number of new technologies and materials, including silicon carbide ceramics, indium phosphide and gallium arsenide semiconductors, microwave power tubes, radiation-hardened microelectronics, superconducting wire, and metal composites.[4]
Defense Production Act of 1950
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Defense_Production_Act_of_1950
The Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-774) was enacted due to "Rising wages and prices during the Korean War [which] caused serious economic difficulties within the United States. In an effort to expand production and insure economic stability, the Defense Production Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-774) authorized Governmental activities in various areas, including requisition of property for national defense, expansion of productive capacity and supply, wage and price stabilization, settlement of labor disputes, control of consumer and real estate credit, and establishment of contract priorities and materials allocation designed to aid the national defense. Under section 712, the Joint Committee on Defense Production was established to serve as a 'watchdog' over Federal agencies administering the various programs authorized by the act. The members of the committee were drawn from the Senate and House Committees on Banking and Currency."[1]
The Defense Production Act Title III Program "authorities were first used extensively during the early 1950s to expedite expansion of industrial capacity for many strategic and critical materials, machine tools, and a number of other critical items needed to satisfy evolving defense requirements. Despite (or, perhaps, partially because of) enormous successes in expanding needed domestic production capabilities, use of Title III declined markedly during the late 1950s and early 1960s and eventually ended altogether by the end of the 1960s. Congress revived and modernized the Title III authorities in the mid 1980s, and these authorities have been used since that time to promote improvement and expansion of industrial capabilities needed for national defense purposes."[2]
"Today's Title III Program differs in fundamental ways from the original program established in 1950. First, the original program was created in response to the national emergency resulting from the Korean conflict and Cold War tensions. Today's program focuses primarily on promoting the transition of new technologies from research and development to efficient and affordable production and the rapid insertion of these new technologies in defense systems."[3]
"Second, the original program was based on virtually unlimited authorities to encourage private investment in materials production and supply. Today's program is subject to a number of restrictions to ensure that Government action is needed and that Title III authorities are the best means to meet the national defense need. Moreover, proposed Title III actions are subject to prior review by Congress and are funded with moneys appropriated for Title III purposes."[4]
"Third, the original program was supported by a funding ceiling of $2.1 billion (in 1950s dollars) and was permitted to obligate these funds based on probable ultimate net cost to the Government rather than total contract liability. Today's program has been funded at an average annual rate of $20-$25 million and has been required to obligate funds at 100 percent of contract liability."[5]
"Despite the significant differences between the original program and today's, the basic purpose of the Title III authorities has not changed - to expand domestic production capabilities to meet defense needs."[6] And, some would argue, to specialize these domestic production capabilities only towards defense needs, assuming that control of global finance, trade and port facilities will continue to feed the civilian sector, and that there is no need, e.g. for US self-sufficiency in oil.
And John Dolva also calls attention to the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) of the US DOD, which developed the Internet among other things.
http://www.acq.osd.mil/ott/dpatitle3/executive.htm
http://bulk.resource.org/gao.gov/81-774/00001DD3.pdf
OpenCongress - U.S. Congress - H.R.6894 Defense Production Act ...HR6894 Defense Production Act Extension and Reauthorization of 2008 on ... OpenCongress is a joint project of the Participatory Politics Foundation and the ...
www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h6894/show - 43k - Cached - Similar pages -
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6894:
Most recent GEO Report :
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08854.pdf
NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (64 Stat. 798; 50 U.S.C. App. 2061, et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:
PART I - PURPOSE, POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION
Section 101. Purpose. This order delegates authorities and addresses national defense industrial resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended ("the Act"), except for the amendments to Title III of the Act in the Energy Security Act of 1980 and telecommunication authorities under Executive Order No. 12472.
Sec. 102. Policy. The United States must have an industrial and technology base capable of meeting national defense requirements, and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency. The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness. The authorities provided in the Act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to all threats to the national security of the United States.
Sec. 103. General Functions. Federal departments and agencies responsible for defense acquisition (or for industrial resources needed to support defense acquisition) shall:
(a) Identify requirements for the full spectrum of national security emergencies, including military, industrial, and essential civilian demand;
(b) Assess continually the capability of the domestic industrial and technological base to satisfy requirements in peacetime and times of national emergency, specifically evaluating the availability of adequate industrial resource and production sources, including subcontractors and suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical personnel;
(c) Be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate industrial resources and production capability, including services and critical technology for national defense requirements;
(d) Improve the efficiency and responsiveness, to defense requirements, of the domestic industrial base; and
(e) Foster cooperation between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development and for acquisition of materials, components, and equipment to enhance industrial base efficiency and responsiveness.
Sec. 104. Implementation.
(a) The National Security Council is the principal forum for consideration and resolution of national security resource preparedness policy.
(b) The Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency ("Director, FEMA") shall:
(1) Serve as an advisor to the National Security Council on issues of national security resource preparedness and on the use of the authorities and functions delegated by this order;
(2) Provide for the central coordination of the plans and programs incident to authorities and functions delegated under this order, and provide guidance and procedures approved by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs to the Federal departments and agencies under this order;
(3) Establish procedures, in consultation with Federal departments and agencies assigned functions under this order, to resolve in a timely and effective manner conflicts and issues that may arise in implementing the authorities and functions delegated under this order; and
(4) Report to the President periodically concerning all program activities conducted pursuant to this order.
(c) The head of every Federal department and agency assigned functions under this order shall ensure that the performance of these functions is consistent with National Security Council policy and guidelines.
PART II - PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS
Sec. 201. Delegations of Priorities and Allocations.
(a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:
(1) The Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) The Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) The Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) The Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) The Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) The Secretary of Commerce for all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
(b) The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the heads of those departments and agencies specified in subsection 201(a) of this order, shall administer the Defense Priorities and Allocations System ("DPA") regulations that will be used to implement the authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act as delegated to the Secretary of Commerce in subsection 201(a)(6) of this order. The Secretary of Commerce will re-delegate to the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of other departments and agencies as appropriate, authority for the priority rating of contracts and orders for all materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order. The Secretary of Commerce shall act as appropriate upon Special Priorities Assistance requests in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the need at hand.
(c) The Director, FEMA, shall attempt to resolve issues or disagreements on priorities or allocations between Federal departments or agencies in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the issue at hand and, if not resolved, such issues will be referred to the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs for final determination.
(d) The head of each Federal department or agency assigned functions under subsection 201(a) of this order, when necessary, shall make the finding required under subsection 101(b) of the Act. This finding shall be submitted for the President's approval through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. Upon such approval the head of the Federal department or agency that made the finding may use the authority of subsection 101(a) of the Act to control the general distribution of any material (including applicable services) in the civilian market.
(e) The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs is hereby delegated the authority under subsection 101(c)(3) of the Act, and will be assisted by the Director, FEMA, in ensuring the coordinated administration of the Act.
Sec. 202. Determinations. The authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense:
(a) By the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, stockpiling, outer space, and directly related activities;
(b) By the Secretary of Energy with respect to energy production and construction, distribution and use, and directly related activities; and
(c) By the Director, FEMA, with respect to essential civilian needs supporting national defense, including civil defense and continuity of government and directly related activities.
Sec. 203. Maximizing Domestic Energy Supplies. The authority of the President to perform the functions provided by subsection 101(c) of the Act is delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, who shall redelegate to the Secretary of Energy the authority to make the findings described in subsection 101(c)(2)(A) that the materials (including equipment), services, and facilities are critical and essential. The Secretary of Commerce shall make the finding described in subsection 101(c)(2)(A) of the Act that the materials (including equipment), services, or facilities are scarce, and the finding described in subsection 101(c)(2)(B) that it is necessary to use the authority provided by subsection 101(c)(1).
Sec. 204. Chemical and Biological Warfare. The authority of the President conferred by subsection 104(b) of the Act is delegated to the Secretary of Defense. This authority may not be further delegated by the Secretary.
PART III - EXPANSION OF PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY AND SUPPLY
Sec. 301.
(a) Financing Institution Guarantees. To expedite or expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items essential to the national defense, the head of each Federal department or agency engaged in procurement for the national defense (referred to as "agency head" in this part) and the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or production in foreign countries) are authorized to guarantee in whole or in part any public or private financing institution, subject to provisions of section 301 of the Act. Guarantees shall be made in consultation with the Department of the Treasury as to the terms and conditions thereof. The Director of the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") shall be informed when such guarantees are to be made.
(b) Direct Loan Guarantees. To expedite or expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items essential to the national defense, each agency head is authorized to make direct loan guarantees from funds appropriated to their agency for Title III.
(c) Fiscal Agent. Each Federal Reserve Bank is designated and authorized to act, on behalf of any guaranteeing agency, as fiscal agent in the making of guarantee contracts and in otherwise carrying out the purposes of section 301 of the Act.
(d) Regulations. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is authorized, after consultation with heads of guaranteeing departments and agencies, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Director, OMB, to prescribe regulations governing procedures, forms, rates of interest, and fees for such guarantee contracts.
Sec. 302. Loans.
(a) To expedite production and deliveries or services to aid in carrying out government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or a critical technology item for the national defense, an agency head is authorized, subject to the provisions of section 302 of the Act, to submit to the Secretary of the Treasury or the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or production in foreign countries) applications for loans.
(b) To expedite or expand production and deliveries or services under government contracts for the procurement of industrial resources or critical technology items essential to the national defense, each agency head may make direct loans from funds appropriated to their agency for Title III.
(c) After receiving a loan application and determining that financial assistance is not otherwise available on reasonable terms, the Secretary of the Treasury or the President and Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (in cases involving capacity expansion, technological development, or production in foreign countries) may make loans, subject to provisions of section 302 of the Act.
Sec. 303. Purchase Commitments.
(a) In order to carry out the objectives of the Act, and subject to the provisions of section 303 thereof, an agency head is authorized to make provision for purchases of, or commitments to purchase, an industrial resource or a critical technology item for government use or resale.
(b) Materials acquired under section 303 of the Act that exceed the needs of the programs under the Act may be transferred to the National Defense Stockpile, if such transfer is determined by the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager to be in the public interest.
Sec. 304. Subsidy Payments. In order to ensure the supply of raw or non-processed materials from high-cost sources, an agency head is authorized to make subsidy payments, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director, OMB, and subject to the provisions of section 303(c) of the Act.
Sec. 305. Determinations and Findings. When carrying out the authorities in sections 301 through 303 of this order, an agency head is authorized to make the required determinations, judgments, statements, certifications, and findings, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Energy or Director, FEMA, as appropriate. The agency head shall provide a copy of the determination, judgment, statement, certification, or finding to the Director, OMB, to the Director, FEMA, and, when appropriate, to the Secretary of the Treasury.
Sec. 306. Strategic and Critical Materials.
(a) The Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense as the National Defense Stockpile Manager and subject to the provisions of section 303 of the Act, is authorized to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of critical and strategic materials and other materials.
(b) An agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(g) of the Act, to make provision for the development of substitutes for strategic and critical materials, critical components, critical technology items, and other industrial resources to aid the national defense.
(c) An agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to make provisions to encourage the exploration, development, and mining of critical and strategic materials and other materials.
Sec. 307. Government-owned Equipment. An agency head is authorized, pursuant to section 303(e) of the Act, to install additional equipment, facilities, processes, or improvements to facilities owned by the government and to install government-owned equipment in industrial facilities owned by private persons.
Sec. 308. Identification of Shortfalls. Except during periods of national emergency or after a Presidential determination in accordance with sections 301(e)(1)(D)(ii), 302(c)(4)(B), or 303(a)(7)(B) of the Act, no guarantee, loan or other action pursuant to sections 301, 302, and 303 of the Act to correct an industrial shortfall shall be taken unless the shortfall has been identified in the Budget of the United States or amendments thereto.
Sec. 309. Defense Production Act Fund Manager. The Secretary of Defense is designated the Defense Production Act Fund Manager, in accordance with section 304(f) of the Act, and shall carry out the duties specified in that section, in consultation with the agency heads having approved Title III projects and appropriated Title III funds.
Sec. 310. Critical Items List.
(a) Pursuant to section 107(b)(1)(A) of the Act, the Secretary of Defense shall identify critical components and critical technology items for each item on the Critical Items List of the Commanders-in-Chief of the Unified and Specified Commands and other items within the inventory of weapon systems and defense equipment.
(b) Each agency head shall take appropriate action to ensure that critical components or critical technology items are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency. "Appropriate action" may include restricting contract solicitations to reliable sources, restricting contract solicitations to domestic sources (pursuant to statutory authority), stockpiling critical components, and developing substitutes for critical components or critical technology items.
Sec. 311. Strengthening Domestic Capability. An agency head, in accordance with section 107(a) of the Act, may utilize the authority of Title III of the Act or any other provision of law, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, to provide appropriate incentives to develop, maintain, modernize, and expand the productive capacities of domestic sources for critical components, critical technology items, and industrial resources essential for the execution of the national security strategy of the United States.
Sec. 312. Modernization of Equipment. An agency head, in accordance with section 108(b) of the Act, may utilize the authority of Title III of the Act to guarantee the purchase or lease of advance manufacturing equipment and any related services with respect to any such equipment for purposes of the Act.
PART IV - IMPACT OF OFFSETS
Sec. 401. Offsets.
(a) The responsibilities and authority conferred upon the President by section 309 of the Act with respect to offsets are delegated to the Secretary of Commerce, who shall function as the President's Executive Agent for carrying out this authority.
(b) The Secretary of Commerce shall prepare the annual report required by section 309(a) of the Act in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense, Treasury, Labor, State, the United States Trade Representative, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the Director of Central Intelligence, and the heads of other departments and agencies as required. The heads of Federal departments and agencies shall provide the Secretary of Commerce with such information as may be necessary for the effective performance of this function.
(c) The offset report shall be subject to the normal interagency clearance process conducted by the Director, OMB, prior to the report's submission by the President to Congress.
PART V - VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Sec. 501. Appointments. The authority of the President under sections 708(c) and (d) of the Act is delegated to the heads of each Federal department or agency, except that, insofar as that authority relates to section 101 of the Act, it is delegated only to the heads of each Federal department or agency assigned functions under section 201(a) of this order. The authority delegated under this section shall be exercised pursuant to the provisions of section 708 of the Act, and copies and the status of the use of such delegations shall be furnished to the Director, FEMA.
Sec. 502. Advisory Committees. The authority of the President under section 708(d) of the Act and delegated in section 501 of this order (relating to establishment of advisory committees) shall be exercised only after consultation with, and in accordance with, guidelines and procedures established by the Administrator of General Services.
PART VI - EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL
Sec. 601. National Defense Executive Reserve.
(a) In accordance with section 710(e) of the Act, there is established in the Executive Branch a National Defense Executive Reserve ("NDER") composed of persons of recognized expertise from various segments of the private sector and from government (except full-time federal employees) for training for employment in executive positions in the Federal Government in the event of an emergency that requires such employment.
(b) The head of any department or agency may establish a unit of the NDER in the department or agency and train members of that unit.
(c) The head of each department or agency with an NDER unit is authorized to exercise the President's authority to employ civilian personnel in accordance with section 703(a) of the Act when activating all or a part of its NDER unit. The exercise of this authority shall be subject to the provisions of subsections 601(d) and (e) of this order and shall not be re-delegated.
(d) The head of a department or agency may activate an NDER unit, in whole or in part, upon the written determination that an emergency affecting the national security or defense preparedness of the United States exists and that the activation of the unit is necessary to carry out the emergency program functions of the department or agency.
(e) At least 72 hours prior to activating the NDER unit, the head of the department or agency shall notify, in writing, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs of the impending activation and provide a copy of the determination required under subsection 601(d) of this order.
(f) The Director, FEMA, shall coordinate the NDER program activities of departments and agencies in establishing units of the Reserve; provide for appropriate guidance for recruitment, training, and activation; and issue necessary rules and guidance in connection with the program.
(g) This order suspends any delegated authority, regulation, or other requirement or condition with respect to the activation of any NDER unit, in whole or in part, or appointment of any NDER member that is inconsistent with the authorities delegated herein, provided that the aforesaid suspension applies only as long as sections 703(a) and 710(e) of the Act are in effect.
Sec. 602. Consultants. The head of each department or agency assigned functions under this order is delegated authority under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The authority delegated by this section shall not be re-delegated.
PART VII - LABOR SUPPLY
Sec. 701. Secretary of Labor. The Secretary of Labor, identified in this section as the Secretary, shall:
(a) Collect, analyze, and maintain data needed to make a continuing appraisal of the nation's labor requirements and the supply of workers for purposes of national defense. All agencies of the government shall cooperate with the Secretary in furnishing information necessary for this purpose, to the extent permitted by law;
(b) In response to requests from the head of a Federal department or agency engaged in the procurement for national defense, consult with and advise that department or agency with respect to (1) the effect of contemplated actions on labor supply and utilization, (2) the relation of labor supply to materials and facilities requirements, and (3) such other matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;
(c) Formulate plans, programs, and policies for meeting defense and essential civilian labor requirements;
(d) Project skill shortages to facilitate meeting defense and essential civilian needs and establish training programs;
(e) Determine the occupations and skills critical to meeting the labor requirements of defense and essential civilian activities and, with the assistance of the Secretary of Defense, the Director of Selective Service, and such other persons as the Director, FEMA, may designate, develop policies regulating the induction and deferment of personnel for the armed services, except for civilian personnel in the reserves; and
(f) Administer an effective labor-management relations policy to support the activities and programs under this order with the cooperation of other Federal agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
PART VIII - DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE INFORMATION AND REPORTS
Sec. 801. Foreign Acquisition of Companies. The Secretary of the Treasury, in cooperation with the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, the Department of Agriculture, the Attorney General, and the Director of Central Intelligence, shall complete and furnish a report to the President and then to Congress in accordance with the requirements of section 721(k) of the Act concerning foreign efforts to acquire United States companies involved in research, development, or production of critical technologies and industrial espionage activities directed by foreign governments against private U.S. companies.
Sec. 802. Defense Industrial Base Information System.
(a) The Secretary of Defense and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, shall establish an information system on the domestic defense industrial base in accordance with the requirements of section 722 of the Act.
(b) In establishing the information system required by subsection (a) of this order, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, shall consult with each other for the purposes of performing the duties listed in section 722(d)(1) of the Act.
(c) The Secretary of Defense shall convene a task force consisting of the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of each military department and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies, as determined by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, to carry out the duties under section 722(d)(2) of the Act.
(d) The Secretary of Defense shall report to Congress on a strategic plan for developing a cost-effective, comprehensive information system capable of identifying on a timely, ongoing basis vulnerability in critical components and critical technology items. The plans shall include an assessment of the performance and cost-effectiveness of procedures specified in section 722(b) of the Act.
(e) The Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Bureau of the Census, shall consult with the Secretary of Defense and the Director, FEMA, to improve the usefulness of information derived from the Census of Manufacturers in carrying out section 722 of the Act.
(f) The Secretary of Defense shall perform an analysis of the production base for not more than two major weapons systems of each military department in establishing the information system under section 722 of the Act. Each analysis shall identify the critical components of each system.
(g) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other Federal departments and agencies as appropriate, shall issue a biennial report on critical components and technology in accordance with section 722(e) of the Act.
PART IX - GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 901. Definitions. In addition to the definitions in section 702 of the Act, the following definitions apply throughout this order:
(a) "Civil transportation" includes movement of persons and property by all modes of transportation in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce within the United States, its territories and possessions, and the District of Columbia, and, without limitation, related public storage and warehousing, ports, services, equipment and facilities, such as transportation carrier shop and repair facilities. However, "civil transportation" shall not include transportation owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, use of petroleum and gas pipelines, and coal slurry pipelines used only to supply energy production facilities directly. As applied herein, "civil transportation" shall include direction, control, and coordination of civil transportation capacity regardless of ownership.
(b) Energy means all forms of energy including petroleum, gas (both natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal, coke, coal chemicals, coal liquification, and coal gasification), and atomic energy, and the production, conservation, use, control, and distribution (including pipelines) of all of these forms of energy.
(c) "Farm equipment" means equipment, machinery, and repair parts manufactured for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for market use of food resources.
(d) "Fertilizer" means any product or combination of products that contain one or more of the elements -- nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium -- for use as a plant nutrient.
(e) "Food resources" means all commodities and products, simple, mixed, or compound, or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. "Food resources" also means all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, cotton, tobacco, wool, mohair, hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.
(f) "Food resource facilities" means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on-farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, livestock and poultry feed and seed, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer (excluding transportation thereof).
(g) "Functions" include powers, duties, authority, responsibilities, and discretion.
(h) "Head of each Federal department or agency engaged in procurement for the national defense" means the heads of the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Commerce, as well as those departments and agencies listed in Executive Order No. 10789.
(i) "Heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies" as used in part VIII of this order means the heads of such other Federal agencies and departments that acquire information or need information with respect to making any determination to exercise any authority under the Act.
(j) "Health resources" means materials, facilities, health supplies, and equipment (including pharmaceutical, blood collecting and dispensing supplies, biological, surgical textiles, and emergency surgical instruments and supplies) required to prevent the impairment of, improve, or restore the physical and mental health conditions of the population.
(k) "Metals and minerals" means all raw materials of mineral origin (excluding energy) including their refining, smelting, or processing, but excluding their fabrication.
(l) "Strategic and Critical Materials" means materials (including energy) that (1) would be needed to supply the military, industrial, and essential civilian needs of the United States during a national security emergency, and (2) are not found or produced in the United States in sufficient quantities to meet such need and are vulnerable to the termination or reduction of the availability of the material.
(m) "Water resources" means all usable water, from all sources, within the jurisdiction of the United States, which can be managed, controlled, and allocated to meet emergency requirements.
Sec. 902. General.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 902(c) of this order, the authorities vested in the President by title VII of the Act may be exercised and performed by the head of each department and agency in carrying out the delegated authorities under the Act and this order.
(b) The authorities which may be exercised and performed pursuant to subsection 902(a) of this order shall include (1) the power to redelegate authorities, and to authorize the successive re-delegation of authorities, to departments and agencies, officers, and employees of the government, and (2) the power of subpoena with respect to authorities delegated in parts II, III, and IV of this order, provided that the subpoena power shall be utilized only after the scope and purpose of the investigation, inspection, or inquiry to which the subpoena relates have been defined either by the appropriate officer identified in subsection 902(a) of this order or by such other person or persons as the officer shall designate.
(c) Excluded from the authorities delegated by subsection 902(a) of this order are authorities delegated by parts V, VI, and VIII of this order and the authority with respect to fixing compensation under section 703(a) of the Act.
Sec. 903. Authority. All previously issued orders, regulations, rulings, certificates, directives, and other actions relating to any function affected by this order shall remain in effect except as they are inconsistent with this order or are subsequently amended or revoked under proper authority. Nothing in this order shall affect the validity or force of anything done under previous delegations or other assignment of authority under the Act.
Sec. 904. Effect on other Orders.
(a) The following are superseded or revoked:
(1) Section 3, Executive Order No. 8248 of September 8, 1939, (4 FR 3864).
(2) Executive Order No. 10222 of March 8, 1951 (16 FR 2247).
(3) Executive Order No. 10480 of August 14, 1953 (18 FR 4939).
(4) Executive Order No. 10647 of November 28, 1955 (20 FR 8769).
(5) Executive Order No. 11179 of September 22, 1964 (29 FR 13239).
(6) Executive Order No. 11355 of May 26, 1967 (32 FR 7803).
(7) Sections 7 and 8, Executive Order No. 11912 of April 13, 1976 (41 FR 15825, 15826-27).
(8) Section 3, Executive Order No. 12148 of July 20, 1979 (44 FR 43239, 43241).
(9) Executive Order No. 12521 of June 24, 1985 (50 FR 26335).
(10) Executive Order No. 12649 of August 11, 1988 (53 FR 30639).
(11) Executive Order No. 12773 of September 26, 1991 (56 FR 49387), except that part of the order that amends section 604 of Executive Order 10480.
(b) Executive Order No. 10789 of November 14, 1958, is amended by deleting "and in view of the existing national emergency declared by Proclamation No. 2914 of December 16, 1950,î as it appears in the first sentence.
(c) Executive Order No. 11790, as amended, relating to the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, is amended by deleting "Executive Order No. 10480" where it appears in section 4 and substituting this order's number.
(d) Subject to subsection 904(c) of this order, to the extent that any provision of any prior Executive order is inconsistent with the provisions of this order, this order shall control and such prior provision is amended accordingly.
Sec. 905. Judicial Review. This order is not intended to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United States, its agencies, its officers, or any person.
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 3, 1994
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)